Post on 21-Apr-2023
VU Research Portal
Microplastic litter in the Dutch marine environment: Providing facts and analysis forDutch policymakers concerned with marine microplastic litterLeslie, H.A.; van der Meulen, M.D.; Kleissen, F.M.; Vethaak, A.D.
2011
document versionPublisher's PDF, also known as Version of record
Link to publication in VU Research Portal
citation for published version (APA)Leslie, H. A., van der Meulen, M. D., Kleissen, F. M., & Vethaak, A. D. (2011). Microplastic litter in the Dutchmarine environment: Providing facts and analysis for Dutch policymakers concerned with marine microplasticlitter. (Rapport 1203772-000). Deltares / IVM-VU.
General rightsCopyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright ownersand it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.
• Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. • You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain • You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal ?
Take down policyIf you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediatelyand investigate your claim.
E-mail address:vuresearchportal.ub@vu.nl
Download date: 26. Jul. 2022
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
Providing facts and analysis for
Dutch policymakers concerned
with marine microplastic litter
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment Providing facts and analysis for Dutch policymakers concerned with marine microplastic litter
1203772-000 © Deltares, 2011
H.A. Leslie (Institute for Environmental Studies, VU University) M.D. van der Meulen (Deltares) F.M. Kleissen (Deltares) A.D. Vethaak (Deltares; Institute for Environmental Studies, VU University)
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
ii
Contents
Foreword 1
Summary, conclusions and recommendations 2
1 Introduction 10
2 Background: materials, sources, persistence and regulation of microplastic litter 14
3 Overview of existing microplastics monitoring programmes and surveys 21
4 Microplastics occurrence – seawater, sediments, biota 25
5 Effects of microplastics on marine biota 39
6 Microplastics monitoring: sampling and analytical methods 48
7 Expert dialogue – Summary and key outcomes 61
Epilogue 64
Acknowledgements 65
References 66
Appendices A Abbreviations used in this report A
B International legislation and policies relevant to microplastics B
C Inventory of existing microplastics programmes and surveys C
D Inventory of stakeholders in plastics in the marine environment D
E Participant list of expert dialogue held 26 September in Utrecht E
1
3
11
15
21
25
39
49
63
67
68
69
85
87
93
95
97
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 1
Foreword
Marine environments all over the world are contaminated with marine litter, mainly plastics.
The Netherlands has raised the subject of the ‘plastic soup’ problem at UNEP and the EU
Environment Council. As well as large plastic debris, there is growing concern about tiny
plastic fragments known as microplastics. Microplastics are part of the overall marine litter
issue, which is attracting attention not only from national and international authorities, but also
NGOs, the media, scientists, consumers, artists, the plastics industry and others.
Microplastics are an important factor in the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD
2008/56/EC), which is closely linked with monitoring work currently being performed by the
OSPAR Commission. The MSFD aims to establish a framework within which member states
take measures to achieve or maintain good environmental status (GES) in the marine
environment by 2020. One of the eleven qualitative descriptors for determining GES under
the MSFD is: “Properties and quantities of marine litter do not cause harm to the coastal and
marine environment” (known as ‘Descriptor 10’). This definition includes microparticles
(particularly microplastics). However, indicators for MSFD Descriptor 10 need to be
developed further and used in assessments in Europe. Current MSFD-supporting
developments regarding the use of microplastics as indicators have had a major impact on
the focus of this report.
The Netherlands launched a fact-finding project to establish what we actually know about the
monitoring and effects of microplastics, focusing on the North Sea region. The results are
presented in this report prepared jointly by Deltares and the Institute for Environmental
Studies (IVM) at VU University Amsterdam. The project aims to provide information that the
Dutch authorities can use in order to define and assess the microplastics issue in the wider
North Sea region and to devise action plans to address it and contribute to global solutions.
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 1
Foreword
Marine environments all over the world are contaminated with marine litter, mainly plastics.
The Netherlands has raised the subject of the ‘plastic soup’ problem at UNEP and the EU
Environment Council. As well as large plastic debris, there is growing concern about tiny
plastic fragments known as microplastics. Microplastics are part of the overall marine litter
issue, which is attracting attention not only from national and international authorities, but also
NGOs, the media, scientists, consumers, artists, the plastics industry and others.
Microplastics are an important factor in the EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD
2008/56/EC), which is closely linked with monitoring work currently being performed by the
OSPAR Commission. The MSFD aims to establish a framework within which member states
take measures to achieve or maintain good environmental status (GES) in the marine
environment by 2020. One of the eleven qualitative descriptors for determining GES under
the MSFD is: “Properties and quantities of marine litter do not cause harm to the coastal and
marine environment” (known as ‘Descriptor 10’). This definition includes microparticles
(particularly microplastics). However, indicators for MSFD Descriptor 10 need to be
developed further and used in assessments in Europe. Current MSFD-supporting
developments regarding the use of microplastics as indicators have had a major impact on
the focus of this report.
The Netherlands launched a fact-finding project to establish what we actually know about the
monitoring and effects of microplastics, focusing on the North Sea region. The results are
presented in this report prepared jointly by Deltares and the Institute for Environmental
Studies (IVM) at VU University Amsterdam. The project aims to provide information that the
Dutch authorities can use in order to define and assess the microplastics issue in the wider
North Sea region and to devise action plans to address it and contribute to global solutions.
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 1
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 1
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
2
Summary, conclusions and recommendations
Backdrop
The world’s oceans are contaminated by marine litter, especially plastics. Plastic is part of the
overall marine litter issue and is rapidly attracting the attention of politicians, the media,
scientists, industry and the general public. The Netherlands has raised the widely-
acknowledged ‘plastic soup’ problem at UNEP and the EU Environment Council. The
European Commission regards plastic waste in the sea as an important problem requiring
urgent attention. In the UNEP Year Book (2011), plastic debris in the ocean is recognized as
one of the three most pressing emerging issues for the global environment.
Microplastics, MSFD indicator of GES
The EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive or MSFD (2008/56/EC) states that good
environmental status (GES) must be achieved in the seas and oceanic areas of all EU
member states by 2020. One of the MSFD descriptors of GES (Descriptor 10) states that the
properties and quantities of marine litter must not cause harm to the coastal and marine
environment. One important type of marine litter is micro-sized plastic particles (known as
‘microplastics’). National authorities in the Netherlands are currently implementing the MSFD,
which is the only policy instrument in place to address pollution by microplastics in the Dutch
environment.
The authorities commissioned Deltares and the Institute for Environmental Studies at the VU
University Amsterdam to carry out a fact-finding project examining the state of knowledge of
microplastics in the Dutch North Sea. The main aim was to highlight what is currently known
about the occurrence, fate and ecological risks of and environmental monitoring methods for
microplastics in the North Sea region by examining the scientific literature and consulting
stakeholders.
The microplastic materials in question have been defined by the international scientific
community as synthetic polymer particles ‘<5 mm’ in diameter. By this definition, nanoplastic
particles (orders of magnitude smaller than microplastics) are included. Ubiquitous in the
global marine environment, they are created either by the weathering and fragmentation of
mass-produced macro-sized plastic litter or are released directly as preproduction pellets and
powders, polymer particles in personal care products (PCPs) and medicines, etc.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 3
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 3
Microplastics contain a cocktail of chemical compounds, such as plastic additives, which may
leach out to the ambient environment or when ingested. In addition, contaminants from other
sources tend to absorb to microplastics: the more hydrophobic a chemical, the greater its
affinity for microplastics.
Occurrence, exposure and ecological and human health risks
The potential ecological and human health risks of microplastics are a new area of scientific
research, and there is currently a large degree of uncertainty surrounding this question.
Evaluating these risks requires knowledge both of exposure levels (i.e. the quantities of
microplastics detected in the environment, including in living organisms) and of hazard (i.e.
the toxicity of microplastics or their ability to cause adverse effects).
Exposure to microplastics in the wider North Sea and other areas has been demonstrated by
studies cited in this report (Chapter 3). Investigations using current detection methods have
so far identified microplastics contamination in North Sea sediments (offshore, harbours,
beaches), North Sea water (surface and 10 m depth) and North Sea marine life (Northern
fulmars, crustaceans, fish etc.). Current knowledge on occurrence of microplastics in Dutch
coastal waters and the greater North Sea is limited.
Hazards of microplastics are more difficult to characterize because of: i) a worldwide lack of
dedicated studies; ii) the fact that particle toxicity is size- and shape-dependent; iii) the fact
that toxicity is also dependent on the specific chemical make-up of the microplastic particle
(polymer, monomer, additives, sorbed contaminants); iv) the sheer diversity of possible types
of microplastics in any given environmental matrix; v) the diversity of uptake routes and
accumulation patterns in vastly different marine life forms and; vi) the challenges of studying
the diversity of potential ecological effects (e.g. vectors for viruses and invasive species; food
chain transfer; biogeochemical cycle effects, etc).
Nevertheless, several studies of the fate and pathology of ultrafine plastic particles in animal
models and human cells, and human placental perfusion studies (to investigate transfer from
mother to foetus) have provided particle toxicity data which is useful when assessing the
hazards posed by microplastics. Toxicity data for many polymer additives and environmental
contaminants associated with microplastics are also available for use in hazard assessment.
The emerging field of aquatic nanotoxicological research has many links to the study of
microplastics toxicity.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment4
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
4
From a regulatory point of view, it is also important to note that microplastics are clearly
persistent, bioaccumulate to various degrees in living organisms, are potentially intrinsically
toxic (esp. due to additives, monomers and particles << 1 mm) and can be transported over
long distances, notably to the five oceanic gyres. By travelling great distances microplastics
can also act as a substrate and vector for the dispersal of alien species, exotic diseases and
anthropogenic chemical compounds.
Biological interactions with microplastics
Living organisms are exposed to microplastics in the marine environment via various routes.
For instance, biofilms1 form on microplastics, as the particles are quickly colonized by
microorganisms including bacteria and diatoms. Field and laboratory research has shown that
microplastics are ingested and retained by marine organisms, after which size-dependent
absorption into certain tissues may take place; food chain transfer of microplastics from prey
to predator has already been demonstrated in a field study. Many possible effects of
exposure to microplastics have been postulated but these hypotheses must be tested with
scientific rigour.
The potential impacts of microplastics and their contaminant load (sorbed chemicals,
monomers additives – which may constitute from ca. 4 up to 80% of the polymer end product)
in the food chain, as well as the implications for ecosystems and human consumers, are a
major concern. While little is known about their toxicity, studies have found that microplastics
can affect phytoplanktonic species and filter-feeding bivalves, which can absorb microplastics
into their tissues.
Drug delivery and occupational exposure research have demonstrated that polyethylene
microparticles (e.g. 150 µm) can also be absorbed by the gastro-intestinal lymph and
circulatory systems of exposed humans. Preliminary research indicates that airborne
nanoplastics (up to 240 nm) can enter the human blood stream and can cross the human
placenta, possibly exposing the developing foetus to these particles. Plastic particles from the
nm to the low µm range are likely to be absorbed by human tissue should exposure to nano-
and microplastics arise.
1 Biofilms are thin layers of microorganisms (diatoms, bacteria, etc.) that form on surfaces.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 5
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 5
Global concern
The global scale of the distribution of microplastic litter, coupled with recent scientific
evidence of microplastics’ potential to transfer through marine food chains and potentially
cause adverse effects in various marine organisms, has fuelled environmental concerns
about this marine contaminant. These early warning signals are being recognized by both
state and non-state actors and lend support to the inclusion of microplastics as a GES
indicator in the MSFD.
The precautionary principle seems warranted in the case of microplastics. Since it will take
time to produce conclusive evidence of ecological effects, it is wise not to wait for consensus
in the scientific and stakeholder communities before action is taken. There is ample support
from the public, the scientific community, NGOs and the plastics industry, in the Netherlands
and abroad, to launch efforts to keep litter out of the (marine) environment.
Conclusion I. Our current knowledge of microplastics distribution in Dutch waters and the North Sea is limited
The information available on the composition and distribution of microplastics in the Dutch
marine environment is scarce because surveys to date have mainly focused on macro-sized
plastic. In the North Sea region microplastics data for beaches are not typically collected, but
surveys specifically focusing on microplastics have investigated sediments, seawater, and a
small number of biological organisms, mostly run by research teams in either the UK, Belgium
or Sweden. In the Netherlands and other countries participating in the OSPAR2 monitoring
programme, seabird (Northern fulmar) stomachs are monitored for litter, including
microplastics (between 1 and 5 mm).
Conclusion II. Marine organisms are exposed to microplastics but biological effects have not been adequately studied
Microplastics have been detected in the tissues of a variety of key species in the marine food
chain worldwide (plankton, crustaceans, mussels, fish and seabirds), and they increase the
substrate surface area for microorganism growth. A number of the studies demonstrating
environmental exposure to microplastics were conducted in the North Sea region. There is
2 OSPAR: Oslo and Paris Conventions for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic;
www.ospar.org
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment6
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
6
currently a worldwide shortage of dedicated studies on the biological and ecological effects of
microplastics. It is expected that the ecological effects of microplastics will be
comprehensively characterized and quantified in the coming decades.
Conclusion III. Microplastics sampling and analytical methods exist, but require further development
Sampling and sample pretreatment methods for microplastics exist for seawater and
sediment. However, they need further development, validation and standardization to fit the
purpose of monitoring under the MSFD. Current methods for microplastics analysis of
environmental samples separate the microplastics by visual identification. More advanced
imaging methods are being developed to increase the objectivity of sample identification.
FTIR and Raman spectroscopy are commonly used techniques for identification of
microplastic polymers detected in environmental samples.
Conclusion IV. Monitoring and research need to be coordinated at national and international level
Member states are obliged to establish and implement monitoring programmes for marine
litter (with associated environmental targets and indicators) to support the implementation of
the MSFD. Criteria and methodological standards are currently being developed by the EU
MSFD Technical Subgroup (TSG) on Marine Litter. In the case of microplastics the current
focus is on research, but in the coming years monitoring programmes are likely to be
developed based on the guidelines set out in the framework of other established marine
monitoring programmes such as OSPAR JAMP, programmes set up under other regional
conventions and the EU TSG on Marine Litter. In this context several member states (e.g.
UK, Belgium) have already started preliminary surveys and microplastics monitoring activities.
The Netherlands has not yet done so, however.
Research into micro- and nanoplastics as environmental pollutants is a rapidly emerging field.
Microplastics research initiatives are not well coordinated in the Netherlands at present.
Researchers in the Netherlands specializing in microplastics in the marine environment come
from four major research universities/institutes: Deltares, TNO, Imares/WUR and IVM-VU.
Additional expertise in environmental monitoring and policy on microplastics exists at the
Dutch Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 7
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 7
Key outcomes of the expert dialogue
On 26 September 2011 close to 30 key experts from the Netherlands, the UK and Belgium
met in Utrecht to discuss microplastics. The diverse group of stakeholders participating in the
dialogue received a draft version of the present report with great interest. It was reiterated
that microplastics represents a new, major, complex global environmental problem that could
have great adverse effects on the environment and on humans. The dialogue made clear that
there is broad agreement among these expert stakeholders that microplastics do not belong
in the marine environment and should be prevented. The experts concluded that continuing
research should stay focused on the impact of both the plastic particles themselves and the
chemical substances that make up plastic products or which later become sorbed to them.
More field research was considered necessary to identify the nature and scale of the problem
in the North Sea, including attention to riverine systems and sediments, the latter of which are
suspected to be sinks. Additionally, group discussions led to the recommendation that marine
microplastic reduction measures should be initiated without delay. Indicators must also be
developed for the implementation of the MSFD and to guide and track progress made with
mitigation measures. The importance of experimental research into adverse effects and risks
was also underlined. The discussions inspired stakeholders at different points during the day
to call for solutions to the microplastics problem and ideas about points in the system to target
for mitigation actions. The participants supported the proposal to establish a regional expert
group on microplastic litter along with neighbouring countries.
Recommendations
Short term:
A preliminary assessment should be conducted to establish the scale and severity of
microplastics pollution in Dutch marine waters. This survey should focus firstly on
presumed sediment accumulation areas on the Dutch Continental Shelf (DCS) and in the
Wadden Sea as well as known emission sources (e.g. wastewater treatment plants). Key
species low in the food chain should be selected to supplement the information provided
by the OSPAR monitoring of Northern fulmars.
o A first step would be to analyze samples (water, sediment, etc.) for the presence and
composition of microplastics.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment8
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
8
Methods and QA/QC for microplastics sampling and analysis should be further
developed, taking into account the recommendations of the EU TSG on Marine Litter.3
Special attention should be focused on methods for measuring the occurrence of
microplastics in sediments and in the water column.
The advice and recommendations provided by the EU MSFD TSG on Marine Litter should
be considered when designing a tailor-made monitoring programme for the EU MSFD.
Transport models should be used to support the design of field surveys and monitoring
programmes for microplastics.
The effort and thus funding required to analyze microplastics in an environmental sample
are similar to those for other environmental contaminants such as persistent organic
pollutants; opportunities should be sought to combine efforts with existing monitoring
programmes for chemicals and their biological effects.
Combine forces: cooperation with other countries (UK, Belgium, etc.) through the
exchange of research methods, data (where possible) and monitoring.
Medium to long term:
Stimulate research into the sources, fragmentation, biodegradation and dispersal of
microplastics in the marine environment, and adapt transport models and food web
models (energy transfer) to microplastics pollution.
The microplastics issue clearly affects a great range of disciplines and the solutions will
require a range of expertise. Natural and social scientists (biologists, chemists,
oceanographers, materials scientists, microscopists, modellers, political scientists,
sociologists, psychologists, economists, legal experts, educators and others) should be
encouraged to work together in interdisciplinary forums, research programmes, etc.
Solutions are likely to be most effective and stand the test of time if they are developed in
teams with attention to the systems and feedback loops affected by the actions. It must
also be acknowledged that integrated, interdisciplinary work is more time-consuming.
Cooperation with both EU and overseas partners should be stimulated to provide input
into the policies being developed both at EU level and globally.
The Dutch Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment could facilitate the formation of a
regional plastic and microplastics litter expert group (together with UK, Belgium and
3 The final report of the EU Technical Subgroup on Marine Litter is expected in November 2011.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 9
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 9
Germany)4 to guide the development of coordinated monitoring and research efforts in the
aquatic environment. The expert group could aim to:
o coordinate and guide the design of new monitoring and research initiatives at national
level, taking into account ongoing international activities;
o identify and catalogue the current questions and research needs of society and
industry;
o present a forum to discuss questions, problems and predictions related to the risks
and other issues associated with microplastics, and subsequently advise the Dutch
government, industry and other stakeholders.
To make the expert group sustainable, funding could be made available where necessary
so that both government staff and non-governmental experts were able to contribute.
4 Similar to the CMA, Chemical Monitoring and Analysis expert group
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment10
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
10
1 Introduction
Plastics and their associated chemicals constitute an emerging environmental issue that is
impacting on our oceans. At the same time, plastics also bring extensive benefits to modern
life (Andrady & Neal 2009). As with most environmental problems, we are seeking a
sustainable balance between societal benefit and environmental damage.
In 2010, Europeans consumed 57 million tonnes of plastic containing chemical additives
(while other chemicals are emitted during the production process) and, due to unclosed
recycling loops and short life applications, Europeans created 24.7 million tonnes of post-
consumer plastic waste (Anon. 2011). Worldwide, we are currently expected to consume at
least 308 million tonnes of plastic and plastics will remain a major growth market for the years
to come (Andrady & Neal 2009). The general public is becoming familiar with unsightly
images of the macroplastic ‘soup’, seabirds dying with plastic debris in their stomachs, and
turtles and other marine life entangled in plastic debris. Awareness of the risks of chemicals
associated with plastics is also growing.
This material so essential to our modern lifestyle is not currently part of a closed loop, with
only small volumes of the total amount of plastic waste currently being recycled (in a limited
number of cycles, Mulder 1998). Some plastic finds its way to incineration facilities, but plastic
waste also can end up in landfills, become urban street litter, or reach wastewater treatment
plants, rivers, beaches, seas and coastal zones and the oceans, where it tends to accumulate
in the oceanic gyres and other sometimes very remote locations (see e.g. Barnes et al. 2009;
Browne et al. 2011; Derraik 2002; Moore 2008; Moore et al. 2001, 2011; Ramirez-Llodra et al.
2011; Thompson et al. 2004, 2009).
Given enough time, this large plastic debris will eventually fragment into micro-sized plastic
particles (which we refer to in this report as ‘microplastics’). Microplastics are pervasive in
seawater and marine sediments. In gyre areas (e.g. in the Pacific Ocean) plastic has been
observed to outweigh plankton biomass by a factor of six (Moore 2008). Other hotspots in the
North Sea have been identified (macroplastics: Galgani et al. 2000), also in the proximity of
industrialised zones (microplastics: Norén 2008). The degradation rates of these synthetic
polymers are extremely low - the material is expected to persist for hundreds to thousands of
years, even longer in deep sea and polar environments (Andradry 2011; Barnes et al. 2009).
Although macroplastics do not fully degrade, they break down into less conspicuous
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 11
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 11
microplastics, defined by the scientific community currently studying marine litter as ‘<5 mm,’
and subsequently into nanoplastics, with particle diameters <1 �m. An illustration of various
types of physical, chemical and biological processes involved in the transport and fate of
microplastics in the marine environment, the leaching and absorption of environmental
chemical contaminants, and interactions with biota, is given in Figure 1.1.
Figure 1.1 Sources of marine microplastics and the various physical, chemical and biological processes affecting microplastics in the marine environment.
Not only is the ecology of the ocean at potential risk (Goldberg 1997; Thompson et al. 2004),
a multitude of interlinked marine ecosystem services to humans are also under threat
(Beaumont et al. 2007). For instance, as consumers of seafood, humans are likely to ingest
microplastics and associated contaminants if the marine organisms have been exposed to
them.
The various signals indicating problems arising from the ‘plastic soup’ have resonated with
the governing bodies of the EU. The Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD
2008/56/EC) requires the European Commission to establish criteria and methodological
standards to enable a consistent evaluation of the extent to which good environmental status
(GES) is being achieved in the marine environment of the EU. To fulfil this obligation the
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment12
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
12
Commission contracted International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) and Joint
Research Council (JRC) to provide support in the form of ten scientific reports, one for each
MSFD descriptor of GES listed in Annex 1 of the Directive. Considering the current body of
data available on microplastic litter in the marine environment, the experts in MSFD Task
Group 10 on Marine Litter recommended that the overriding objective of the MSFD for
Descriptor 10 (marine litter) of GES ‘be a measurable and significant decrease in comparison
with the initial baseline in the total amount of marine litter by 2020’, including a reduction in
‘microparticles, especially microplastics’, as one of the GES indicators5 (Galgani et al. 2010;
MSFD 2008/56/EC).
Scope
The focus of this report will be microplastic particles (<5 mm diameter). The microplastics
issue is intrinsically linked to the macroplastic litter issue since microplastics reach the
environment not only by emissions of manufactured microplastic particles but also by
fragmentation of macro-sized plastic litter.
The report provides information on current activities for the monitoring of microplastics in the
North Sea. It is also supplemented with microplastics studies elsewhere in the world, since
this field of study is still at an early stage of development. We look at methods currently
applied in the sampling of microplastics in the North Sea area. Different matrices (water
column, sediment, biota) are studied and we summarize what is known from the current
(small) body of scientific literature about the ecotoxicological and human health effects of
microplastics.
The issue of microplastics in the environment is a complex subject matter and a novel and
rapidly evolving area of marine environmental research. Recent reports have tackled many
aspects of this issue. They include Galgani et al. (2010), Thompson et al. (2009), UNEP
(2005), Van Weenen & Haffmans (2011), as well as reviews in the scientific literature and
conferences (e.g. Andrady 2011, Arthur et al. 2009a; Bowmer & Kershaw 2010).6 We make
no attempt to repeat this commendable work, focusing instead on providing a critical review of
5 An ‘indicator’ is a measurable parameter for an MSFD descriptor of Good Environmental Status. 6 Socioeconomic impacts, waste management issues and public awareness are not the focus of this report. We
would refer interested readers to other literature such as: Ewalts et al. 2010; Galgani et al. 2010; Gregory 1999; Hall 2000; Ivar do Sul & Costa 2007; Mouat et al. 2010; National Research Council 2008; Steegemans 2008; Ritch et al. 2009; UNEP 2005, 2009.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 13
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 13
monitoring methods and offering perspectives which can be useful for policymakers in the
Netherlands.
The proliferation of scientific publications over the last decade has provided major input to the
report. This has been supplemented with information from the authors’ participation in recent
international scientific conferences and meetings, various stakeholder meetings and the
expert dialogue described below.
A key aim of this report is to identify knowledge gaps and to identify research priorities for the
environmental monitoring and impact assessment of microplastics that are broadly supported
by Dutch stakeholders, which the government of the Netherlands may then choose to
promote internationally and/or pursue itself at the national level.
Main objectives of this report
1 to provide an overview of current knowledge on the occurrence and fate of microplastics
in the North Sea region obtained from pilot field studies of microplastics and monitoring
initiatives in the Netherlands and neighbouring countries (Chapters 3,4); where possible,
the ecological risks and implications for the food chain and human health will be
considered (Chapter 5);
2 to describe the sampling and analytical methods available for microplastics and discuss
the implications for monitoring (Chapter 6);
3 to establish a dialogue among experts and important actors at a national level who are
part of the solution to the plastic/microplastic soup problem, report on the outcome of
the dialogue and improve the report where possible on the basis of expert input
(Chapter 7).
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment14
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
14
2 Background: materials, sources, persistence and regulation of microplastic litter
This section contains relevant background information on the types of materials that make up
microplastic litter and on the sources of microplastic litter. Also some remarks on the
environmental persistence of these materials and a brief overview of relevant legislation will
be given.
Polymers
The main component of most microplastic particles is synthetic polymer(s). Normally these
polymers have high production volumes and are made from petroleum-based raw materials:
about 8% of global oil production goes towards the production of plastics (Andrady & Neal
2009). Currently a very small percentage of polymers (not more than 1%) are produced from
biomass-based feedstocks. These are the subject of important research.7 Polymers are
synthesized either by joining monomer units to form a polymer, e.g. nylon, or by creating a
free radical monomer, which by a chain reaction quickly produces a long chain polymer, e.g.
polyvinyl chloride (Bolgar et al. 2008). The plastics with the highest production volumes -
polyethylene, polypropylene, polyvinylchloride, polystyrene and polyethylene terephthalate
(see also list of substances in Table 2.1) - together supply 75% of the demand for plastics in
Europe (Anon. 2011).
Table 2.1 List of commonly produced plastic polymers (Anon. 2011).
7 In the Netherlands, DSM and the Dutch Polymer Institute are involved in the development of methods using
fresh biomass as a replacement for fossil resources in the production of synthetic polymers, which are then chemically identical to synthetic polymers from petroleum-based feedstocks.
Polypropylene (PP)
Polystyrene (PS)
High impact polystyrene (HIPS)
Polycarbonate (PC)
Polyvinylidene chloride (PVDC) (Saran)
Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene (ABS)
Polyethylene terephthalate (PET)
Polyester (PES)
Polyethylene (PE)
Polyamides (PA) (Nylons)
Polyvinyl chloride (PVC)
Polyurethanes (PU)
Polycarbonate/Acrylonitrile
Butadiene Styrene (PC/ABS)
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 15
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 15
Additives
The polymers in plastics are almost never pure. Plastics can be regarded as a cocktail of
polymers combined with different additives. By way of a ‘compounding’ process, additives
give the plastic product a variety of desirable properties. Additives include plasticizers that
make plastics flexible and durable, flame retardants, surfactants, additives that enhance
resistance to oxidation, UV radiation and high temperatures, modifiers to improve resistance
to breakage, pigments, dispergents, lubricants, antistatics, nanoparticles or nanofibres, inert
fillers, biocides, and even fragrances. Besides additives, other chemicals such as auxiliary
substances (catalysts of polymerization, initiators and accelerators) are used and may be
emitted during the plastics production process (Mulder 1998).8
Additives need to be considered part of the potential ecological impact of microplastics due to
their sheer production volumes and the known or suspected toxicity of many of these
substances. The market is growing, with demand for global plastic additives estimated at 11.1
million tonnes in 2009, up from 8.3 million tonnes in 2000; about half of this volume is
plasticizers (Reuters press release Feb 2011). Comparing this 2009 figure to plastics
production, additives account for around 4% of the total weight of plastics produced.
However, the percentage of additives can vary significantly; in some cases additives make up
half of the total material, especially in the case of soft PVC (Mulder 1998). In polymers
sampled from electronic waste, brominated flame retardants alone were detected in all
products tested in amounts ranging from approx. 5% to over 15% of the total weight
(Schlummer et al. 2005).
Sometimes additives are already added to preproduction pellets, but other additives may be
added after that stage, when the plastic is being processed into the end product. The
additives in polymers can leach out of plastics at various points during the life cycle of the
product (e.g. Sajiki & Yonekubo 2003). This can amount to large emissions of chemical
additive leachates downstream in the plastic use chain, which may cause toxicity to aquatic
life (Lithner et al. 2009). This adds to the plastics-related emissions by the chemical industry
and plastics processing industries (Mulder 1998). The role of additives in the ecological
impact of microplastics is discussed later in this report (Chapter 5).
8 Chemical emissions during plastics production include volatile organic substances, monomers, as well as
auxiliary substances, although these emission patterns can differ (in quantities, toxicological profiles of substances, etc.) compared to the emission of substances from microplastic litter once it has reached the marine environment (Mulder 1998).
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment16
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
16
Primary microplastics
Primary microplastics are engineered for applications such as personal care products (PCPs),
e.g. toothpaste, shower gel, scrubs etc. (Arthur et al. 2009a,b; Derraik 2002; Fendall & Sewall
2009; Gregory 1996; Thompson et al. 2004; Zitko & Hanlon 1991). These are typically down
the drain items from households or industry in the case of industrial scrubs. The sandblasting
industry now uses primary microplastics (which are vacuumed up for reuse) because they
stay sharper and effective for longer than sand particles. When industrial cleaning products
containing microplastics are released, they may also be contaminated with materials from the
surfaces they were cleaning, e.g. machinery parts (Gregory 1996). The amounts of
microplastics in PCPs in Europe are unknown, although emissions of micro-sized
polyethylene in PCPs by the US population have been estimated at 263 tonnes/yr (Gouin et
al. 2011). Primary microplastics are not expected to be as common as secondary
microplastics (Barnes et al. 2009).
Secondary microplastics
Secondary microplastics consist of fragments of macroplastic litter (Figure 2.1) which can be
emitted from sea or land (Fendall & Sewell 2009; Gregory 1996). Sea-based sources include
litter dumped overboard on ships, derelict fishing gear, aquaculture (Astudillo et al. 2009;
Hinojosa & Thiel 2009) and water-based recreation (Bowmer & Kershaw 2010).
Figure 2.1 Macroplastics, such as in this picture of Dutch beach litter at Vlissingen, NL, degrade into smaller
fragments, thereby acting as a source of microplastics. Photo A.D. Vethaak.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 17
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 17
Land-based sources of macroplastics that reach the sea include street litter, uncovered
landfills, dumps or waste containers, agricultural plastics, wastewater effluents and overflows,
rivers, various human (recreational) activities in coastal zones, emissions of plastic debris
(e.g. Ryan et al. 2009), and emissions during transport of plastic products (e.g. Bowmer &
Kershaw 2010; UNEP 2009). Browne et al. (2011) report that in excess of 1900 microplastic
fibres from clothing can be released into domestic wastewater by laundering a single garment
in a domestic washing machine; these researchers found the same types of fibres in
shoreline habitats around the world. The estimates of the proportion of land-based/sea-based
macroplastic litter vary and are subject to uncertainty, particularly in the case of waste that
can be generated on land as well as on ships. The rates and routes of transport of
microplastics via the air (possibly emitted during sandblasting, from fragmenting macroplastic
urban or agricultural plastic litter, etc.) and subsequent atmospheric deposition at sea are
unknown at this time.
Persistence of microplastics in the marine environment
Plastics are valued for their extreme durability and have been considered to be among the
most non-biodegradable synthetic materials in existence (Sivan 2011). The abiotic and biotic
degradation rates of synthetic polymers are extremely low - the material is expected to persist
for hundreds to thousands of years, even longer in deep sea and polar environments
(Andrady 2011; Barnes et al. 2009; Drimal et al. 2006; Gregory & Andrady 2003; Lavender
Law et al. 2010; Shah et al. 2008). Extremely slow degradation rates also apply to
‘bioplastics’, which are synthetic polymers made from plant biomass used as feedstock, and
which do not differ chemically from synthetic polymers made from fossil feedstocks.
‘Biodegradable’ plastic polymers have been developed but will degrade only under specific
conditions (of light, O2 levels, microbial species, presence or absence of other carbon sources
etc.). Generally speaking biodegradable plastic does not degrade under normal
environmental conditions, as verified by its persistence in landfills. Some plastics marketed as
biodegradable are blends of nondegradable synthetic polymers with starch, in principle
enabling enzymatic degradation of the starch component, but yielding micro-sized particles of
the persistent synthetic polymer. These micro-sized fragments then further degrade at the
usual extremely slow rate (hundreds of years). Such types of biodegradable plastic should
therefore also be considered a source of secondary microplastic particles.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment18
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
18
Policies and legislation on microplastics pollution
Table 2.2 Policies, legislation and agreements most relevant to plastic litter, with short description of the purpose.
International
OSPAR Convention 1992 Guidance for international cooperation on the protection of the marine
environment of the North-East Atlantic
MARPOL Annex 5 1988 (revised 2011)
International Maritime Organization (IMO)
Prevention of marine litter pollution under IMO (International Maritime
Organization) conventions
London Convention on the Prevention of
Maritime Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and
Other Matter (1972)
Prevention of marine pollution by dumping of wastes and other matter
UNEP Global Programme of Action for the
Protection of the Marine Environment from Land-
based Activities (GPA) and UNEP Regional
Seas Programme
These UNEP units joined forces to establish a Global Initiative on
Marine Litter in 2003, an ongoing platform for managing the problem
through establishing partnerships and cooperative arrangements and
coordinating joint activities
FAO (UN) Plastic Water Bottle Awareness Campaign and promoting alternatives
The Honolulu Strategy Global framework for a comprehensive and global effort to reduce the
ecological, human health and economic impacts of marine debris
European
EU Marine Strategy Framework Directive
(2008/56/EC)
To achieve ‘good environmental status’ (GES) by 2020 across
Europe’s marine environment
EU Directive on port reception facilities for ship-
generated waste and cargo
residues (2000/ 59/EC, December 2002)
To enhance the availability and use of port reception facilities for ship-
generated waste and cargo residues
EU Directive on packaging and packaging waste
(2004/12/EC)
Harmonizing national measures concerning the management of
packaging and packaging waste, enhancing environmental protection
EU Fisheries Policy Setting quotas for fish caught by member states, as well as
encouraging the fishing industry by various market interventions
EU Waste Directive Encouraging recycling of waste within EU member states
REACH Directive (EC1907/2006) Registration, evaluation, authorization and restriction of chemicals
EU Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) Ensures that all aquatic ecosystems and wetlands in the EU have
achieved 'good chemical and ecological status' by 2015
EU Directive on the landfill of waste
(1999/31/EC)
To prevent or minimize possible negative effects on the environment
from the landfilling of waste, by introducing stringent technical
requirements for waste and landfills
Bathing Water Directive (2006/7/EC) To preserve, protect and improve the quality of the environment and to
protect human health
National
Wet voorkoming verontreiniging door schepen Implementation of the MARPOL Convention
Waterwet (integration of eight water laws, 2009) Implementation of the London Convention
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 19
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 19
There is currently no international, EU or national legislation in the Netherlands that
specifically mentions microplastics, apart from the Marine Strategy Framework (MSFD
2008/56/EC). Annex 1 of the MSFD lists qualitative descriptors for determining good
environmental status in the marine environment in Europe. Descriptor 10 reads “Properties
and quantities of marine litter do not cause harm to the coastal and marine environment”. It
further states that “Member States shall consider each of the qualitative descriptors listed in
this Annex in order to identify those descriptors which are to be used to determine good
environmental status for that marine region or subregion.”
The EU Waste Directive defines waste very broadly and sets no minimum size limits in the
definition of litter. It also promotes recycling, which is regarded as a means of reducing the
emissions of plastic by extending the use of the material by several extra cycles before it
becomes waste, thereby reducing the rate of creation of secondary microplastics. Other
legislative instruments may indirectly address microplastic environmental pollution through
the regulation of marine litter emissions from sea-based sources (e.g. MARPOL Annex 5),
restrictions on plastic packaging (e.g. EU Directive on packaging and packaging waste),
policies banning plastic bags, etc. A list of these and other regulations which may be linked to
the marine microplastics issue is presented in Table 2.2. For a more extensive overview, see
Appendix B.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment20
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 21
3 Overview of existing microplastics monitoring programmes and surveys
The Netherlands
There are a number of monitoring programmes and surveys concerned with macroplastics in
the Netherlands. They include Fishing for Litter (KIMO9 Netherlands-Belgium), Coastwatch
(North Sea Foundation) and the marine litter on beaches survey (OSPAR) (Appendix C).
Furthermore, at IMARES, stomach contents of Northern Fulmars are studied to assess the
presence of marine litter in the OSPAR region. In 2011 the North Sea Foundation sampled
microplastics from seawater near the Dutch coastal zones and purchased PCPs in local
stores for microplastics analysis at IVM-VU as part of a pilot project (in progress at time of
writing). The majority of the surveys in the Netherlands consider macroplastics only, however,
focusing particularly on beach clean-ups. A unique study of plastic litter (including
microplastic litter) in Dutch river systems was performed by a Utrecht University bachelor’s
student (Van Paassen 2010).
Apart from monitoring marine litter, a number of initiatives have also been undertaken to raise
awareness of marine litter in the Netherlands. A few of these are highlighted here, although
there are many more. Zwervend langs Zee, for example, a project set up by RWS Noordzee,
KIMO and the North Sea Foundation that aims to clean up Dutch beaches and raise
awareness among the general public. In 2009 Dutch writer Jesse Goossens published a
Dutch-language book on the subject entitled ‘Plastic Soup’, which was instrumental in raising
awareness in the Netherlands (Goossens, 2009). The Plastic Soup Foundation was initiated
in the Netherlands in 2010, aiming to raise awareness of environmental issues surrounding
plastic litter, including marine microplastics. In 2010 Dutch broadcasting organization VPRO
made a documentary entitled ‘The Beagle: In the Wake of Darwin’ (http://beagle.vpro.nl) in
which representatives of waste management companies Royal Boskalis and Van
Gansewinkel Group participated, cruising on the clipper ‘Stad Amsterdam’ (outside the North
Sea area) to observe marine litter in the field and come up with solutions to the plastic soup
problem. Students of Wageningen University in the Netherlands, which was commissioned by
Oost NV to conduct an academic consultancy training project, also joined the voyage of the
Beagle to work on plastic soup projects in cooperation with the North Sea Foundation (see De 9 KIMO is the abbreviation for Local Authorities International Environmental Organisation; more information at
www.kimointernational.org/NetherlandsandBelgium.aspx.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 21
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
22
Vreede et al. 2010). The aim of this study was to organize the existing knowledge on the
plastic soup in a more systematic manner and to map the first steps towards possible
solutions. Maria Gorycka (2009) wrote a comprehensive MSc thesis on the environmental
risks of microplastics at the Institute for Environmental Studies in Amsterdam in cooperation
with the North Sea Foundation. Prof. Hans van Weenen (2011) wrote an exploratory review of
microplastics in the oceans. The Royal Dutch Chemistry Society’s (KNCV) Macromolecule
Section and Environmental Chemistry Section are organizing a joint symposium on the topic
of synthetic polymer environmental pollution in 2012. For an overview of the most relevant
stakeholders see Appendix D.
North Sea region
So far, no European country has set up a monitoring programme specifically for microplastics.
A number of research initiatives are currently underway however, initiated mainly as a result
of the introduction of the MSFD (OSPAR 2011):
1 Belgium has set up the AS-MADE (Assessment of Marine Debris on the Belgian
Continental Shelf) programme with the aim of creating an integrated database
containing data on the presence, occurrence and distribution of marine debris including
both macro- and micro-litter. This will provide an overview of the environmental hazard
posed by marine debris.
2 Germany has made microparticles part of a research and development programme
designed to come up with initial proposals on how to monitor the digestion of micro-
particles and the accumulation of toxic substances in organisms.
3 France is automating evaluation methods and creating models to predict accumulation
areas of microparticles.
4 Sweden is using the national plankton sampling of 2010 to make a preliminary
assessment of microplastics abundance. At the University of Gothenburg, Dr. Delilah
Lithner completed a PhD thesis entitled Environmental and Health Hazards of
Chemicals in Plastic Polymers and Products (Lithner 2011).
5 The United Kingdom has launched a project led by Dr. Richard Thompson from the
University of Plymouth that intends to look at ‘harm’ of microplastics. Another project, by
U of Plymouth and SAPHOS, focuses on the spatial and temporal trends in
microplastics using CPR. Defra sponsors a number of projects on microplastics and
work is being carried out by Cefas (monitoring) and the University of Exeter and
University of Plymouth (PhD project). Dr. Tamara Galloway of the University of Exeter is
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment22
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 23
currently conducting a study (UK NERC 2010-2013) of the impact of microplastics at the
base of the marine food web, effects on life history traits in planktonic species,
especially coastal calanoid species, uptake and feeding studies.
The UK (Cefas, University of Plymouth, University of Sheffield, University of Exeter) and
Belgium (University of Ghent, ILVO) and N-Research AB in Sweden cooperation with KIMO
can be considered frontrunners in microplastics research in the North Sea area. However,
none of these research and surveying activities has yet been undertaken in a regional setting.
In terms of raising awareness, some initiatives do exist at regional level, including Fishing for
Litter, Save the North Sea and Blue Flag (see Appendix C). These programmes focus mainly
on macro-litter.
International
On an international scale, the USA is one of the main countries setting up campaigns and
research programmes for plastic litter in the marine environment. The USA has enacted the
Marine Debris Research, Prevention, and Reduction Act (2006), created the Interagency
Marine Debris Coordinating Committee and the government-funded NOAA Marine Debris
Program (Glackin and Dunnigan, 2009; http://marinedebris.noaa.gov/) that develops
protocols, collects data and communicates on the issue. The NOAA also organised the high-
profile Fifth International Marine Debris Conference (5IMDC), held March 20-25, 2011 in
Honolulu. In addition, strong NGOs such as Algalita, set up by Charles Moore, the
‘discoverer’ of the garbage patch in the North Pacific Gyre, have been instrumental in
providing data and momentum to develop the monitoring and assessment of marine debris,
including microplastics. UNEP is currently sponsoring a round-the-world expedition to sample
microplastics.
Keys to success include sustained funding and institutional support for the prevention and
removal of marine debris, and a focus not only on the international level, but also on the
national, regional, state and local levels.
EU research initiatives
The European Union is stimulating research on litter by providing funds to research institutes
in consortia. Dutch research institutes, consultants and NGOs are well represented in the
consortia which submit proposals for these calls. The most relevant activities are listed:
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 23
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
24
• ENV.G.4./FRA/2008/0112, contract 07.0307/2009/545281/ETU/G2, EU-commissioned
report “Plastic Waste in the Environment” Final Report April 2011 (171 pp);
• FP7 EU Science and Society “MARLISCO” project with 19 partners (start date in 2011);
• EU FP7 NV.2012.6.2-4 Management and potential impacts of litter in the marine and
coastal environment (‘The Ocean for Tomorrow’) - FP7-ENV-2012-two-stage (expected
start date in 2012);
• ENV.D.2/ETU/2011/0045 Feasibility study of introducing instruments to prevent littering
(expected start date in 2012);
• ENV.D.2/ETU/2011/0041 Pilot Project - Plastic recycling cycle and marine
environmental impact - Case studies on the plastic cycle and its loopholes in the four
European regional seas areas (expected start date in 2012);
• ENV.D.2/ETU/2011/0043 Study of the largest loopholes within the flow of packaging
material (expected start date in 2012);
• INTERREG offers opportunities for further regional microplastics work (expected start
date in 2012).
Balance between macroplastics and microplastics initiatives
It is apparent from this summary that there is a lack of microplastics research and monitoring
in the Netherlands, as well as in most other European countries. The focus of surveys on
marine plastics tends to be macro-sized plastic particles. This is probably due to the fact that
macro-plastics are more visible, making the issue evident to the general public. Furthermore,
larger pieces of plastics are easier to clean up and sample than microplastics, especially
when it comes to litter on beaches.
Some neighbouring countries in the North Sea region (e.g. the UK, Belgium) are setting up
research and monitoring programmes specifically for microplastics. However, insight into the
scope of the problem in the region is still lacking. Cooperation between countries, for example
through EU consortia or INTERREG projects within this region, would be beneficial to the
advancement of knowledge and best practice. With macroplastics as the source of secondary
microplastics, trends in macroplastic litter will always remain relevant to the study of marine
microplastics. As we will discuss in later chapters of this report, microplastics are expected to
have different toxicokinetics (i.e. rates of absorption, distribution, elimination and perhaps
even biodegradation), different toxicodynamics (mechanisms of toxic action) and different
ecological effects than macro-sized plastic litter. It is therefore also important to characterize
microplastic litter if we are to assess the ecological and human health risks of marine litter.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment24
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 25
4 Microplastics occurrence – seawater, sediments, biota
In this chapter we briefly review data on the occurrence of microplastics in i) seawater (and
rivers), ii) sediments and iii) biota, for which sampling and analytical protocols or guidelines
are either in use or under development (e.g. Arthur et al. 2009b; Baker et al. 2010). The body
of literature is limited compared to many surveys of macroplastics, particularly those using
methods for sampling on beaches (e.g. OSPAR 2007).
Microplastics in seawater (and rivers)
Microplastics were first identified 40 years ago by Carpenter et al. (1972) in plankton net
trawls of seawater in the Sargasso Sea. They identified the presence of microbial biofilms on
the plastic particles and examined the gut contents of 14 species of fish caught on the same
voyages to confirm the ingestion of microplastics in eight of those species. The plastic
particles sampled from the seawater surface with a plankton net (333 µm mesh size) were
present at average concentrations between 0.04 and 2.58 microplastic particles/m3 (maximum
concentration observed: 14 microplastic particles/m3), and were identified by infrared
spectrometry as polystyrene. Colton et al. (1974) also counted microplastic particles in a large
number of surface plankton samples in the Atlantic Ocean and determined that 62% of them
also contained plastic. See Table 4.1 for an overview of these data and references and all
other data discussed in this section.
A temporal trend analysis was performed on specimen-banked plankton samples collected off
the shores of Great Britain between the 1960s and the 1990s. Thompson et al. (2004)
showed an increase in the incidence of microplastics in these samples over time. Swedish
researchers have performed other important seawater sampling studies in the North Sea
region (Norén 2008; Norén & Naustvoll 2011). One important observation was that when an
80-�m mesh size was used to extract microplastics from seawater (150 to 2400 particles/m3),
up to 100,000 times higher concentrations were collected than when a 450-�m mesh size
(0.01 to 0.14 particles/m3) was used at the same location. Norén & Naustvoll (2011) then
studied an even smaller range of microparticle sizes: 10 �m to 500 �m, resulting in
concentrations 1000 times higher than most other previously reported concentrations. Most of
the microparticles detected in the 2011 study were not microplastics but had other
anthropogenic origins (such as ash, paint, rubber, particles from road wear, oil fractions).
Microplastic fibres in samples were below the limits of detection due to the level of the blanks
(i.e. a control of the background concentrations), which appeared to be 0.2 to 1 particle/L in
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 25
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
26
two different blanks in which ultra pure water (MilliQ) was filtered in the same manner as the
samples.
Only a handful of studies of the occurrence of microplastics in seawater and marine
sediments in the North Sea area have been performed to date. They show that microplastics
are present in these matrices (Table 4.1). Reported concentrations range from 1 to 400
microplastic particles/kg dry sediment and from 0.01 to 102,000 particles/m3 in seawater (the
last figure representing a ‘hotspot’, Norén 2008). Elsewhere in the world, many more studies
have demonstrated the ubiquitous nature of microplastic pollution at low background levels to
high levels at hotspots (Table 4.1).
Table 4.1 Microplastics concentrations observed in seawater surface samples from the North Sea Area, greater
Atlantic Ocean and Pacific Ocean (CPR, continuous plankton recorder).
Sampling mesh size Occurrence Location Reference
North Sea area
127 mm2 aperture in the
CPR on to a scrolling
280 �m-mesh silkscreen
Microplastics in CPR records
increased since 1960, peak: 0.04 -
0.05 fibres/m3 (1980s).
Samples collected at
10 m over 40-year
period on standard
shipping routes
Thompson et al. 2004
80 �m 150-2400 particles/m3 Harbour and ferry
locations in Sweden,
depth 0-0.3 m
Norén 2008
450 �m 0.01 to 0.04 particles/m3 Harbour and ferry
locations in Sweden,
depth of 0-0.3 m
Norén 2008
0.5-2 mm 102,000 polyethylene particles/m3 Harbour near
polyethylene plant
Norén 2008
10-500 �m although
method optimal for 10-
300 �m
Microplastic fibres in samples same
concentration as control (0.2 to 1
particle/L)
Skagerrak, Norwegian
South coast
Norén & Naustoll 2011
Continuous Plankton
Recorder studies
Microplastics widely detected over
the North Atlantic Ocean.
UK coastal areas and
North Atlantic Ocean
Edwards et al. 2011
Atlantic Ocean 333 �m, between 30 and
600 m3 seawater sampled
per trawl
Polystyrene spherules (<2 mm) 0.04
and 2.58 particles/m3 (max 14/m3)
North-Eastern coastal
waters USA
Carpenter et al. 1972
Surface plankton net n=247 samples, 62% contained
plastic particles
Cape Cod USA to the
Caribbean
Colton et al. 1974
A neuston net 0.4x0.4 m
opening; 308 µm mesh
size
3.5 particles/km2 20 transects (length 1.85
km, sampling approx.
740 m2 each transect)
(200 km E of N.S.,
Canada)
Dufault & Whitehead
1994
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment26
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 27
Table 4.1. continued.
Sampling mesh size Occurrence
Location
Reference
Atlantic Ocean
330-�m mesh manta net 142 mg microplastic/g dry weight
seawater. Microplastics between
0.33 and 5 mm.
Baltimore Harbour,
USA
Arthur et al. 2009c
335-�m mesh plankton
net
Time series 1986 – 2008: 60% of
6136 surface tows collected
buoyant microplastic pieces;
highest microplastics incidence
observed between 22° and 38°N.
N. Atlantic Subtropical
Gyre
Lavender Law et al.
2010
Pacific Ocean
Neuston net mesh size
3.0 mm and 0.333 �m
Concentration microplastic
particles/ km2 in Bering Sea
80±190; in Subarctic North Pacific
3370±2380; in Subtropical North
Pacific 96100±780000.
Bering Sea, Subarctic
and Subtropical North
Pacific
Day & Shaw 1987
Net of mesh size
0.053 �m (Sameoto
neuston sampler)
Most plastic fragments fell into the
0.5 mm size class (22 locations,
81.5%).
27 locations in the
North Pacific Ocean
Shaw & Day 1994
330 �m plankton net 5114 particles/km2. 98% were thin
films, PP/ monofilament line or
unidentified plastic.
11 neuston samples
North Pacific Gyre
Moore et al. 2001
Manta trawl lined with
333 �m mesh
Average plastic density: 8 pieces/
m-3; density after the storm was 7x
higher than prior.
5 locations offshore of
San Gabriel River
(California, USA)
Moore et al. 2002
10 L of seawater
collected per sample,
filtered over 1.6 �m
glass microfiber filter
PE, PP and PS microplastic (1-2
particles/10 L when detected; 35%
of samples <LOD) in surface
microlayer samples (top 50-60 �m)
and subsurface layer (1 m).
2 locations on north and
south sides of in
Singapore Island
coastal waters. 20
samples total
Ng & Obbard 2006
Neuston net (mouth
opening 50 x 50 cm; side
length 3 m; mesh size
330 �m)
Plastics detected at 72% of
locations; mean mass of
3600 g/km2 and mean abundance
of 174,000 particles/km2. Dominant
size class: 3 mm.
76 stations in the
Kuroshiro Current area
(North Pacific Ocean)
Yamashita & Tanimura
2007
Manta net neuston
sampler
Detectable microplastics at 56-68%
of stations; average size
2.3-2.6 mm. Median concentrations
range 0.011–0.033 particles/m3 in
different years, with a maximum of
3.141 particles/m3.
California current
system - California
Cooperative Oceanic
Fisheries
Investigations. Winter
sampling in 1984, 1994,
2007
Gilfillan et al. 2009
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 27
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
28
Zones to which wind-driven currents lead are typically locations where large amounts of
floating microplastic debris accumulate (e.g. North Atlantic gyre, Lavender Law et al. 2010).
Lavender Law et al. estimated, based on concentrations of particles and the average mass of
each particle (1.36 × 10�5 kg), that the total amount of plastic in the North Atlantic Subtropical
Gyre is 8 × 1010 pieces or 1100 metric tons. No time trend could be identified in the
observations made by Lavender Law et al. (2010), covering 22 years during which plastics
production and concomitant plastic waste production increased exponentially. These data
suggest that the residence time of microplastics (>333 µm) in the sea surface layers is fairly
short – weeks or months rather than years.
Further support for this hypothesis comes from the study by Lattin et al. (2004), who found
microplastic litter (>333 µm) to be most prevalent in the epibenthic part of the water column
(sampled with an epibenthic sled, which also samples part of the sediment), followed by the
surface layers sampled with a manta trawl, and then the mid-depth zone. The mid-depth zone
sampled by Lattin et al. with a Bongo plankton net was the least enriched with microplastics.
Microplastics sampled at the water surface can also be influenced by storms. Moore et al.
(2002) found an average of eight microplastic pieces/m3 in a Californian coastal zone, though
in the same area, the concentration increased by a factor of seven after a storm event. It was
suggested that the higher river discharge brought more microplastics to the upper sea layers.
Having collected microplastics in the upper 20 cm seawater surface in a zone between
Hawaii and the US West Coast since 2003, Proskurowski et al. (2010) measured higher
microplastics concentrations at wind speeds <15 knots (equivalent of 28 km/h). They also
noticed that towing nets simultaneously in the top 20 cm and at a depth of 3-5 m affected the
microplastics concentrations detected, with neuston layers showing up to 25% of the surface
layer concentrations.
Vertical transport of plastic debris has been discussed by Holmström (1975) and by Ye &
Andrady (1991). When buoyant plastics are biofouled, they tend to sink. Holmström (1975)
reported LDPE sheets found by fishermen at 180-400 m depths in Sweden, and suggested
that at different depths, the species distribution of the biological growth on the plastic will
change. However, after some time in the deep sea, the biofouling may slough off and cease,
creating buoyancy again (Ye & Andrady 1991). A list of microplastics in seawater surveys can
be found in a report by the National Research Council entitled ‘Tackling marine debris in the
21st century’ (National Research Council 2008).
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment28
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 29
Input of plastic waste from rivers (Table 4.2) is recognized as a major source of plastic waste
in the marine environment. In the Netherlands it has been estimated that 5000 tonnes of
waste is transported to the marine environment on an annual basis (cited in Van Paassen
2010). Moore et al. (2011) measured large emissions in the LA River in California. Smaller
particles (<5 mm) were 16 times more abundant than those >5 mm and the total mass of <5
mm was also three times higher than large mesoplastic particles. In the case of rivers,
sewage treatment plant (STP) effluents may be important emission sources of microplastics
(including primary microplastics). One study to date has reported on levels of 1 microplastic
particle/L STP effluent sampled from two different STPs in Australia (Browne et al. 2011).
Table 4.2 Microplastics concentrations observed in riverine environments.
Sampling Occurrence Location Reference
Visual collection according
to OSPAR beach survey
methods
Micro pellets were found on the
river banks of the Meuse.
River banks, the
Netherlands
Van Paassen 2010
Manta trawl, 0.9 x 0.15 m,
mesh size 333 µm
Total number of plastic objects
and fragments: 2,333,871,120.0
(2.3 billion); total weight of
plastic objects and fragments:
30,438.52 kg (30 metric tons) in
72 hours. The majority of these
were foams.
Los Angeles River, San
Gabriel River and
Coyote Creek, California
USA
Moore et al. 2011
Microplastics in sediment
As discussed in the previous section, it has been suggested that the residence time of
microplastics at the water surface is short. As a result of biofouling and degradation, the
particles eventually sink to the bottom as marine snow. If this hypothesis is true, higher
concentrations of plastics would be expected in sediments than in the water layers above.
Research on microplastics occurrence in submerged sediments (i.e. not on beaches) is
hampered by extra difficulties and the expense of collecting sea sediments compared to
surface seawater sampling. As a result of irregular sampling, different protocols and different
observers (samples are typically analyzed visually), there are few datasets spanning more
than a decade (Barnes & Milner 2005).
Richard Thompson was one of the first researchers to look at the occurrence of microplastics
in sediments. In addition to studying CPR microplastics samples, Thompson et al. (2004)
studied submerged marine sediments in the UK, demonstrating that microscopic particles and
filaments had accumulated in 23 of 30 sediment samples.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 29
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
30
Norén (2008) sampled marine sediments from Swedish coastal areas, at Tjuvkils harbour and
Stenungsund. In 100 ml sediment samples taken with an Eckman grab (top layer) between
one and ten microplastic particles were detected in Tjuvkils harbour, while over 300 plastic
particles of 0.5 to 1.0 mm diameter were detected in 100 ml of sediment from Stenungsund.
Another important study in the North Sea region analyzed sediment samples from the Belgian
continental shelf (BCS), as well as harbour and beach samples, identifying maximum
concentrations (390 particles/kg sediment, dry weight) - more than an order of magnitude
higher than previously reported sediment microplastics levels (Claessens et al. 2011). Taking
all types of microplastics together, mean concentrations (with standard deviations, s.d.) in
units of microplastic particles/kg dry sediment in the Belgian harbours studied were 167 (s.d.
92), on the Belgian continental shelf (BCS) they were 96 (s.d. 19) and on Belgian beaches,
93 (s.d. 37). The levels reported are for particles in the 38 µm to 1 mm fraction range. An
example of the amount of (visible) microplastics that can be found on beaches is shown in
Figure 4.1.
Figure 4.1 Illustration of the amount of visible microplastics found in beach sand. Photo A.D. Vethaak.
To date, several studies worldwide have looked at microplastics both on beaches and in
sediments (Table 4.3). It is difficult to directly compare sediment microplastics levels across
all of these studies due to differences in reporting units (e.g. number of particles per kg dry
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment30
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 31
sediment, number of particles/ml of wet (or unspecified) sediment, g of microplastic/g of
sediment, etc.). See Chapter 6 for a discussion.
Table 4.3 Occurrence of microplastics in beach and marine sediments.
Sampling method Occurrence data Location Reference
North Sea area
Sediment samples were
collected using a small trowel
(strandline), and an Eckman
grab (subtidal).
Polymers detected in 23 of the 30
samples. Approx. 0.5 particles/50 ml
sediment (sandy), approx. 2.5
(estuarine) and approx. 5.5
(subtidal). Most plastic fragments
were fibrous, 20 �m in diameter and
brightly coloured.
17 beaches/ subtidal
areas of the UK
Thompson et al.
2004
Sediments sampled with
Eckman; supernatant of
saturated NaCl solution mixed
with sediments sieved over
80 �m mesh
Between 2 and 332 (‘hotspot’) plastic
particles were found per 100 ml.
3 Swedish coastal sites:
Stenungsund industrial
harbour, Stenungsund
Bay and small harbour at
Tjuvkils Huvud
Norén 2008
Sediment samples collected at
strandlines, top 3 cm.
Between 1 and 8 particles per 50 ml
sediment; higher density polymers
more represented in samples than
lower density.
Tamar Estuary UK Browne et al.
2010
Van Veen grab (70 kg, 0.1 m2
sampling surface); Beach
locations: sediment cores were
taken.
Concentrations up to 390 particles/kg
dry sediment (15-50 times higher
than max. concentrations reported
for other similar areas).
Belgian harbours, sea
stations and beach
locations
Claessens et al.
2011
Van Veen grab of top 10 cm;
sediment stored in 500 ml
aluminium containers,
subsamples sieved (unspecified
mesh size)
Microplastic fibers <1 mm were
detected on average ca. 1 particle/50
ml sediment.
Two UK marine sewage
sludge disposal (and
reference site) in North
Sea and English
Channel
Browne et al.
2011
Atlantic Ocean
Sand samples were scooped
with a small shovel from a 61 x
61 cm2 quadrant to a depth of
approximately 5.5 cm, to fill a
20-L bucket.
72% of the sampled debris by weight
was plastics. A total of 19,100 pieces
of plastic were collected from the
nine beaches, 11% of which was pre-
production plastic pellets.
Nine coastal locations
throughout the Hawaiian
Archipelago
McDermid &
McMullen 2004
Bottom samples were taken with
an epibenthic sled with a 31 cm2
opening, a 1 m long, 333 µm net
and a 30 x 10 cm2 collection
bag.
Microplastics density greatest in deeper layers. Nearshore surface/middle depths: before storm: 0-1 particles/m3; after: 10-19 particles/m3. Offshore deep layers before storm: 6-7 particles/m3, after: 1-2 particles/m3.
Two Santa Monica Bay
sites offshore from
Ballona Creek, which
drains Los Angeles. The
trawl distance was
between 0.5 and 1.0 km.
Lattin et al. 2004
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 31
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
32
Table 4.3 continued
Sampling method
Occurrence data
Location
Reference
Atlantic Ocean
Collection of sediments 0.5 m
away from the ocean tideline.
Microplastics were found in four out of
seven beaches samples. Polyethylene,
polypropylene and polystyrene
microplastics were also found in the
surface microlayer (50-60 um) and
subsurface layer (1 m) of coastal
waters.
Seven beach locations
around Singapore.
Ng & Obbard
2006
Oceanic samples taken by
unknown method (likely a
manta trawl) others with
tweeze, scoops or taken into
glass storage jars.
Total concentration of PCBs, DDTs,
PAHs and aliphatic hydrocarbons in
pre-production thermoplastic resin
pellets and post-consumer plastic
fragments were 27-980 ng/g,
22-7100 ng/g, 39-1200 ng/g and
1.1-8600 µg/g.
North Pacific Gyre, and
selected beach sites in
California, Hawaii, and
from Guadalupe Island
(stomach content of
Laysan albatross
colony), Mexico.
Rios et al. 2007
Sediments were collected by
divers by scooping sediment
from the top several
centimetres of the benthos
with their hands and a bucket.
105 to 214 fragments/L sediment were
found.
Three locations along
the east coast of the
U.S.A.: Panacea and
Fort Pierce, Florida;
Walpole, Maine.
Graham &
Thompson 2009
Beach samples were collected
weekly along a 70-m2 transect
at low tide.
Plastic densities on the beach ranged
from 0.752-1.39 g/ml. Microplastics
identified as: HDPE, low density
polyethylene (LDPE) and
polypropylene (PP).
An enclosed beach on
Washburn Island,
Massachusetts, USA.
Morét-Ferguson
et al. 2010
Microplastics and marine biota exposure
Field exposure studies
The presence of macroplastics in wild seabirds, sea turtles, mammals and hundreds of other
marine animals has been documented and reviewed (Derraik 2002; Thompson et al. 2009).
Reports of microplastics in biota sampled in the field are rarer (Table 4.4), although the
phenomenon has been known for four decades (Carpenter 1972).
As part of the OSPAR monitoring programme, researchers at IMARES have been examining
North Sea-foraging Northern Fulmar stomachs for marine litter >1 mm in diameter (Van
Franeker et al. 2011), which includes a microplastics component according to the definition of
all polymer particles <5 mm diameter.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment32
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 33
In a Scottish study of field-sampled Norway lobsters, Nephrops norvegicus, stomach content
analysis revealed that microplastics were present in 83% of the 120 specimens’ gut contents
examined with light and scanning electron microscopy (Murray and Cowie 2011).
Microplastics did not appear to be eliminated in the normal digestive process. Microplastics
concentrations were measured, but not reported in the publication.
Defra in the UK lists plastics as a ‘prey item’ in the DAPSTOM long-term fish stomach content
monitoring database, and has noted that these analyses could provide an inexpensive
supplement to plastics monitoring efforts (Pinnegar & Platts 2011). In the DAPSTOM
database generalist predator fish such as cod, whiting and grey gurnard in particular were
identified as fish which have eaten plastics, although the size of the particles is not known
(Table 4.4).
In the North Pacific Central Gyre, Boerger et al. (2010) detected plastics in the stomach
contents of 35% of the planktivorous fish sampled (n=670, 5 mesopelagic, 1 epipelagic
species, fish specimens 1-10 cm length) (see Figure 4.2). The most common size class of the
plastic in detected these fish was between 1 and 2.79 mm, which indicates the plastic
particles the fish were ingesting were mainly in the microplastics category. In fish where
plastics were detected, the mean abundance and mass of plastic was calculated (see Table
4.4).
Figure 4.2 Lanternfish with large piece of plastic (unpassable) which broke into three pieces (left); Stomach
contents – plankton on left, plastic on right (right). Reprinted with permission of Christina Boerger.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 33
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
34
The presence of persistent, non-biodegradable (i.e. non-biotransformable) contaminants in
organisms (‘bioaccumulation’) gives rise to concerns about trophic transfer and
biomagnification10 in the food web. Documentation of the transmission of these types of
particles through the food web has been provided by Eriksson & Burton (2003), who surveyed
Southern fur seal scat on Macquarie Island. They found that scats contained plastic particles
from the night-feeding myctophids (lanternfish), which are active near the sea surface, and
are consumed by the seals. Myctophids were also shown to bioaccumulate microplastics in
their stomachs in the study by Boerger et al. (2010) mentioned above. More studies on food
chain transfer of microplastics are expected to be published in the near future, as at least one
new project has been initiated on this subject (see Chapter 3). Food chain transfer is of
concern particularly in convergence zones (hotspots), where microplastics are potentially
consumed in large amounts due to the high concentrations they can reach in the water
column, as reported by Moore (2008) who found that microplastics were more prevalent than
plankton in some South Pacific Gyre sea surface samples. Any disturbances due to
microplastics at such low levels of the food chain could have serious consequences, since
plankton and nekton (small swimming organisms, such as fish larvae) facilitate the transfer of
energy to higher trophic levels.
A significant proportion of sediment-dwelling organisms’ exposure to microplastics may be via
ingestion of sediment or filtration of particles near the sea bottom. Many benthic
macroinvertebrates ingest sediment and associated organic matter as a food source, or filter
out suspended particles from the pore water or overlying water layers. Biota-sediment
accumulation factors or bioaccumulation factors for microplastics have not yet been reported
in the literature for marine organisms sampled in the field. The concentration in the animal
often cannot be compared to the concentration in the sediment or water phase if these
matrices are not sampled simultaneously at the same location.
10 Biomagnification is a process by which the contaminants ingested with prey/food items lead to body residues of
contaminants that increase with the trophic level in the food chain. Predators have higher concentrations than their prey, which can be explained in part because the elimination of the contaminant proceeds at a much slower rate than the rate of contaminant intake through food.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment34
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 35
Table 4.4 Summary of studies of microplastics exposure in field-sampled marine organisms.
Marine species Plastics exposure Reference
North Sea Area
Fulmarus glacialis (Northern Fulmar) Plastics were found in the stomachs of 95% of
fulmars sampled in the North Sea during 2003-
2007. The critical level of 0.1 g of plastics (EcoQO
under OSPAR) was exceeded in more than half
(58%) of the individuals. 60% of Dutch fulmars
exceeded the critical 0.1 g level.
Van Franeker et al.
2011
Cod, whiting, grey gurnard ‘Plastics’ listed as prey item in UK marine fish
stomach content analysis (n=22) cases since
1990.
Pinnegar & Platts
2011
Atlantic Ocean
Clytia cylindrica, Gonothyraea hyalina
(hydroids)
Most microplastics surfaces had these hydroid
species, Sargasso Sea.
Carpenter & Smith
1972
Mastogloia angulata
M. pusilla, M. hulburti, Cyclotella
meneghiniana, Pleurosigma sp.
(diatoms)
Most microplastics surfaces had these diatom
species, Sargasso Sea.
Carpenter & Smith
1972
Myoxocephalus aenus (grubby) 4.2 % with microplastics in gut, Sargasso Sea. Carpenter et al. 1972
Pseudopleuronectes americanus (winter
flounder)
2.1 % with microplastics in gut, Sargasso Sea. Carpenter et al. 1972
Roccus americanus (white perch) 33 % with microplastics in gut, Sargasso Sea. Carpenter et al. 1972
Menidia menidia (silverside) 33 % with microplastics in gut, Sargasso Sea. Carpenter et al. 1972
Sagitta elegans (chaetognath) 1 specimen sampled. Gut contained microplastics,
Sargasso Sea.
Carpenter et al. 1972
Larvae of winter flounder and grubby 5 mm fish larvae contained polystyrene beads of 0.5
mm in length, Sargasso Sea.
Carpenter et al. 1972
Calcareous bryozoans and Lithoderma
(brown alga)
LDPE sheets collected by fishermen (high incidence;
nearly every trawl brought up plastics) from seafloor
at Skagerak Sweden at 180 to 400 m depth, with a
combination of biofilm species: Bryozoans typical at
15 m depth; Lithoderma typical at 15-25 m depth.
Holmström 1975
Nephrops norvegicus
(Norway lobster)
83% of animals (n=120) had microplastics in stomach
(mainly filaments), Clyde Sea, Scotland.
Murray & Cowie 2011
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 35
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
36
Table 4.4. continued
Marine species Plastics exposure
Reference
Pacific Ocean
Antarctic fur seals Arctocephalus spp.
(predator) and the fish Electrona
subaspera (prey)
145 fur seal scats examined, in total 164 microplastic
particles found (at least 1 particle per sample). Most
particles 3-5 mm length, some as high as 30 mm.
Composition: PE 93%, PP 4%, poly(1-Cl-1-butenylene)
polychloroprene 2%, melamine-urea (phenol)
(formaldehyde) resin 0.5%, cellulose 0.5%. Study site:
Macquarie Island.
Erikkson & Burton
2003
Astronesthes indopacifica1 1.0 plastics particles and 0.03 mg plastic/fish gut Boerger et al. 2010
Cololabis saira2 3.2 plastics particles and 1.97 mg plastic/fish gut Boerger et al. 2010
Hygophum reinhardtii1 1.3 plastics particles and 1.82 mg plastic/fish gut Boerger et al. 2010
Loweina interrupta1 1.0 plastics particles and 0.64 mg plastic/fish gut Boerger et al. 2010
Myctophum aurolanternatum1 6.0 plastics particles and 4.66 mg plastic/fish gut Boerger et al. 2010
Symbolophorus californiensis1 7.2 plastics particles and 5.21 mg plastic/fish gut Boerger et al. 2010
1pelagic fish; 2epipelagic fish
Note Boerger et al. (2010) data are means of data for all individuals which had ingested plastic.
Laboratory exposure studies
Laboratory studies (see Table 4.5) are now also showing that microplastics are taken up by
invertebrates, e.g. lugworms, amphipods and barnacles (Thompson et al. 2004), mussels
(Browne et al. 2008) and sea cucumbers (Graham & Thompson 2009). Marine mussels - a
species also used for human consumption - were exposed to seawater containing
microplastics accumulated plastic particles in the hemolymph; once the particles were filtered
out of the water column and ingested they were able to move from the gut to the circulatory
system and be retained in the tissues (Browne et al. 2008). Graham & Thompson (2009)
showed that benthic-dwelling sea cucumbers ingest a variety of shapes and sizes of
microplastics. Sediments collected from the natural habitat of these animals contained 105-
214 plastic fragments/L sediment (US Atlantic coastal zone), and preliminary chemical
analysis showed the plastic particles were contaminated with PCBs. Another recent
laboratory study by Teuten et al. (2007) has shown that plastics may be important agents in
the transport of hydrophobic contaminants to benthic organisms such as lugworms.
It is not yet known to what extent microplastics may be absorbed by plankton, although
Bhattacharya et al. (2010) presented results of nano-sized plastic particles (20 nm) sorbing to
phytoplankton.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment36
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 37
Little data was found in the scientific literature on the occurrence of microplastics in marine
mammals, with the exception of a study of fur seals by Eriksson & Burton (2003). Various
species of fur seals on Macquarie Island consume the pelagic fish Electrona subaspera as a
major prey species. Microplastics were observed in association with otoliths of these fish in
the scat of various fur seal species, which the authors suggest would indicate a trophic
transfer of these materials. Microplastics may potentially also be mistaken for food by large
mammalian planktivores such as the blue whale.
Once chemicals enter food chains, the top predators are often at extra risk because of the
biomagnification and trophic magnification effects of some chemicals. If plastics and their
associated contaminants enter food chains, humans may ultimately be at risk too (Talsness et
al. 2009). The next chapter examines the effects of microplastics on exposed biota.
Table 4.5 Summary of studies of microplastics exposure in laboratory-sampled marine organisms.
Marine species Plastics exposure Reference
Suspension- and deposit-
feeding bivalves
Particle-feeding bivalves demonstrate a capacity for
particle selection.
Ward & Shumway 2004
Mussel Mytilus edulis
oyster Crassostrea virginica
10-um, non-fluorescent polystyrene beads. Ward & Kach 2009
Four species of sea cucumber
(Echinodermata,
Holothuroidea)
Deposit- and suspension-feeding sea cucumber ingest
small plastic fragments along with sediments (15-25 mm).
Furthermore, during feeding trials, the organisms
ingested between 2 and 20-fold more plastic per
individual (PVC fragments) and between 2- and 138-fold
more nylon line than expected.
Graham & Thompson 2009
Arenicola marina (lugworms)
The addition of 1 �g polyethylene (with sorbed
phenanthrene) to a gramme of sediment significantly
increased phenanthrene accumulation in sediment
dweller A. marina.
Teuten et al. 2007
Mytilus edulis (mussel)
Initial experiments with mussels showed that microplastic
particles accumulate in the gut. Mussels were
subsequently treated with seawater containing
microplastics (3.0 or 9.6 �g). These particles moved from
the gut to the circulatory system within 3 days, persisting
there for over 48 days. Smaller particles persisted for
longer than larger ones, indicating that smaller particles
have a greater potential for accumulation in tissues than
larger ones.
Browne et al. 2008
Nephrops norvegicus
(Norway lobster)
In an experimental setup, Nephrops were fed fish with
strands of polypropylene rope. Plastic particles were
found to be ingested, but not excreted.
Murray & Cowie 2011
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 37
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
38
Table 4.5. continued
Marine species
Plastics exposure
Reference
Orchestia gammarellus
(amphipod)
Arenicola marina (lugworm)
and Semibalanus balanoides
(barnacles)
A. marina were kept at a density of one individual /L in
sediment containing 1.5 g microplastics/L, O.
gammarellus on stones with 1.0 g/L and S. balanoides in
seawater with 1.0 g/L. All three species ingested plastics
within several days.
Thompson et al. 2004
Placopecten magellanicus (sea
scallop)
A mixture of three sizes of PS beads (5, 10 and 20 �m) or
a mixture of beads of different densities (1.05 g/ml and
2.5 g/ml) were presented to scallops. P. magellanicus
can distinguish between particle size and density,
retaining larger particles (20 �m) longer than smaller
ones (5 �m) and lighter particles longer than denser
ones.
Brillant & MacDonald 2000
Placopecten magellanicus (sea
scallop)
P. magellanicus was presented with a mixture of organic
(14C-labelled Prorocentrum minimum) and inorganic (15Cr-
labelled beads diameter 16-18 um) particles. Ratio
decreased in favour of organic particles, indicating that
scallops were sorting organic from inorganic particles.
Organisms were fed with a mixture of protein-coated and
uncoated beads; protein-coated beads were retained in
the gut for longer than uncoated beads.
Brillant & MacDonald 2002
Corophium volutator
(mud shrimp)
Plastic particles in gut and hepatopancreas. T. Galloway (pers. comm.)
Scenedesmus and Chlorella1
(green algae)
Nano-sized plastic beads; adsorption of nano plastics. Bhattacharya et al. 2010
Mytilus edulis (mussel)
Digestive gland vacuoles in mussels absorb 1-80 �m microplastics associated with granulocytoma formation (inflammation). An increase in haemocytes and a significant decrease in lysosome stability were found after 48 h.
Koehler & von Moos (in
Bowmer & Kershaw 2010)
Bacteria, picoeukaryotes and
Archaea
Biofilm colonization of polyethylene (LDPE). Harrison et al. 2010
Microbial biofilm Colonization of microbial biofilms on 2 cm x 2 cm
polyethylene films in seawater (3 weeks). This coincided
with significant changes in the physicochemical
properties of PE and more neutral buoyancy of the films.
No indication of the presence of plastic-degrading
microorganisms observed.
Lobelle & Cunliffe 2011
1freshwater species
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment38
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 39
5 Effects of microplastics on marine biota
The ecological risks posed by microplastics to marine organisms are a nascent area of
scientific research and at present they are largely uncertain. Evaluating such risks requires
knowledge of both exposure levels (i.e. the quantity of microplastics detected in the
environment, including in biota) and hazard (i.e. intrinsic toxicity or the ability of microplastics
to elicit adverse effects). Exposure to microplastics in the North Sea and other areas has
been demonstrated by studies cited above (Chapter 3), both in terms of ‘external’ exposure
(the route via abiotic environmental matrices in the marine habitat) and ‘internal’ exposure
(body residues of the contaminant). The hazard is determined by measuring deleterious
effects of exposure to microplastics. Such effects can potentially arise from particle toxicity or
chemical toxicity (additives, monomers, sorbed chemicals), or both.
In this chapter we review the small body of literature on the effects of microplastics measured
in biota, as well as articles relating to ultrafine plastic particles in the nanometre range. At the
nanoscale, another type of toxicity issue arises (Browne et al. 2007). Microplastics may
fragment into particles in the nano (10-9 m) range, but also the production of engineered
nanoplastics such as nanoplastic fibrils, plastic-clay nanocomposites, and plastics enriched
with carbon nanotubules may contribute to nanoplastic emissions (see e.g. Ajayan & Tour
2007). Nanoplastic organic electronics and nanoplastic templates are also being developed.
Nano-sized particles are entering into a huge array of applications and can be expected to
contribute to the total mass of plastics debris and also to toxicity to organisms that ingest or
are exposed to them. We draw on selected studies from the emerging field of nanotoxicology
(mostly focused on ultrafine particles between 1 and 100 nm) and the well-established fields
of particle toxicology (e.g. particulates <2.5 or 10 µm or PM2.5 and PM10 resp.) and drug
delivery science (both nanospheres and microspheres) to give an insight into the potential
effects of microplastics and nanoplastics, (both primary and secondary). It is moreover
important to note that the toxicities of engineered nanoparticles (ENPs) are themselves
diverse, and the toxicity of a given ENP is not directly extrapolatable to secondary
nanoplastics (Andrady 2011).
Observed effects of microplastics (and nanoplastics) on marine species
Reports of effects caused by microplastics or nanoplastics in marine taxa are as yet
extremely rare (Table 5.1). The marine mussel Mytilus edulis was exposed to microplastics
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 39
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
40
between 1 and 80 µm, which was absorbed by digestive gland vacuoles and various effects
were observed, including granulocytoma formation (inflammation), an increase in haemocytes
and a decrease in lysosome stability (Koehler & Von Moos, in Bowmer & Kershaw, 2010).
The abundance of individuals of the aquatic insect species Halobates sericeus was studied in
seawater samples in which microplastics abundance was scored. A positive correlation
between abundance of microplastics and abundance of insects was observed, although the
study was not designed to prove causality. It could be hypothesized that the insect, which is
dependent on substrate surfaces to lay eggs, was able to proliferate more easily in areas
enriched with microplastics (see link in Table 5.1). Van Franeker et al. (2011) noted that
sublethal effects related to ingestion of plastics are difficult to detect in the field. The amounts
of plastics in the stomach content of the seabirds examined do not differ significantly in birds
with different causes of death (starvation, drowning, etc.).
Bhattacharya et al. (2010) worked with nano-sized plastic beads and two species of algae
(one freshwater and one marine/freshwater species) and found that sorption of nanoplastics
to algae hindered algal photosynthesis and appeared to induce oxidative stress.
Bioavailability of polystyrene particles is known to be affected by their charge due to
electrostatic repulsion (Hussain et al. 2001). What this effect at the basis of the food chain
could mean for the productivity and resilience of ecosystems in the long term is unknown.
Polymer mass in stomach contents may irritate the stomach tissue and cause abdominal
discomfort, which may stimulate the organism to feel full and cease eating (Derraik 2002;
Galgani et al. 2010; Mascarenhas et al. 2004; Robards et al. 1995, others listed in National
Research Council Report 2008). The stomach contents of wild Norway lobster contained
microplastics that had formed tangled balls of filaments (most probably from the fisheries
industry) (Murray & Cowie 2011). Galgani et al. (2010) suggest that polymer mass in the
stomach ‘unavoidably has mechanical and chemical consequences that affect their body
condition with negative consequences for individual survival and capacity to reproduce’.
However, evidence of such effects has yet to be systematically collected.
Xenobiotic particles accumulating in organs and tissues may evoke an immune response:
foreign body reaction and granuloma formation (Tang & Eaton 1999). Behavioural responses
in terms of feeding (lack of impulse to eat with a ‘full’ stomach) have also been suggested
(see Galgani et al. 2010; National Research Council 2008). In addition, abdominal pain may
be experienced in some organisms with high amounts of microplastics accumulating in the
gut, which may aggregate and affect general fitness (Galgani et al. 2010; National Research
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment40
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 41
Council 2008). Effects of ingestion of marine litter reported to date include reducing the space
available for food in the gastrointestinal tract, ulceration of tissues, and mechanical blockage
of digestive processes (e.g. Azzarello & Van Vleet 1987; Fry et al. 1987; Ryan & Jackson
1987; Ryan 1988; Spear et al. 1995).
Table 5.1 Observed biological effects of microplastics exposure in marine organisms and mammalian systems.
Species Microplastics exposure and effect Reference
Marine species
Mytilus edulis (marine
mussel)
Digestive gland vacuoles absorbed 1-80 �m microplastics with
associated: granulocytoma formation (inflammation), increase
in SB haemocytes after 48 h, and decrease in lysosome
stability after 48 h.
Koehler & von Moos (in:
Bowmer & Kershaw 2010)
freshwater/saltwater
Scenedesmus
Nano-sized plastic beads; adsorption of nanoplastics hindered
algal photosynthesis and promotion of algal ROS (Reactive
Oxygen Species) production is indicative of oxidative stress.
Bhattacharya et al. 2010
Fulmarus glacialis
(Northern Fulmar)
Sublethal or lethal effects of plastic in stomach were not tested. Van Franeker et al. 2011
Halobates sericeus
(pelagic insect)
90 samples (collected using manta net-1.0 by 0.2 m, 333 µm
mesh size) from four cruises analyzed. Strong positive
relationship between abundance of H. sericeus and plastic
debris in the North Pacific Central Gyre found in 2009, but no
causal relationship or ecological effects could be tested within
the study design.
http://amnh.com/nationalcen
ter/youngnaturalistawards/2
011/marci.html
Mammalian, terrestrial species
Human oesophageal
epithelial cells
Endocytosis of fluorescent latex microspheres. Hopwood et al. 1995
Rat Lung inflammation and enzyme activities were impacted, with
increasing severity as particle size tested decreased from 535
nm to 202 nm to 64 nm polystyrene.
Brown et al. 2001
Human alveolar
epithelial cells
Polystyrene latex beads (240 nm diameter) shown to be
phagocytised.
Kato et al. 2003
Human lymph and
circulatory system
Polyethylene microspheres taken up in lymph and circulatory
system from gastro-intestinal tract.
Hussain et al. 2001
Human placenta (ex
vivo) Fluorescently labelled polystyrene particles with diameters of
50, 80, 240 and 500 nm. Particles up to 240 nm were taken up
by the placenta and transported through it.
Wick et al. 2010
Human airway smooth
muscle cell
Fluorescent polystyrene spheres (40 nm) decreased cell
contractility.
Berntsen et al. 2010
Human endothelial
cells (interior surface of
blood vessels)
Carboxyl polystyrene latex beads in sizes of 20-40-60-140-200-
500 nm were tested. 20 nm polystyrene particles induced
cellular damage by induction of apoptosis and necrosis.
Particles were taken up into endosomes and lysosomes in a
size-dependent manner.
Fröhlich et al. 2009
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 41
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
42
Observed effects of microplastics (and nanoplastics) in mammalian systems
The effects of particles observed in human cells and tissues or in animal models (Table 5.1)
gives an insight into the possible risks of particle exposure in other organisms and in humans,
who occupy a high tropic level in the marine food chain, and who can potentially be exposed
to primary microplastics while using products that contain them.
In a study of exposure to ultrafine polystyrene particles in rats, lung inflammation and enzyme
activity were impacted, in a dose-dependent way, the greater the surface area:volume ratio of
the particle. Toxicity increased in direct proportion to a decrease in particle size from 535 nm
to 202 nm to 64 nm polystyrene (Brown et al. 2001). Many other effects of ultrafine plastic
were measured in vitro in the same study, including induction of increases in IL-8 gene
expression in epithelial cells and an increase in cytosolic calcium ion concentration. The
authors suggest that these particle-induced calcium changes may be may be significant in
causing proinflammatory gene expression, such as chemokines. A large body of literature has
been published on the human toxicity of particles, mainly via the inhalation exposure route
(e.g. Dockery & Pope 1994; Hesterberg et al. 2010; Kato et al. 2003; Walczyk et al. 2010),
but also via other exposure routes such as the gut (e.g. Hopwood et al. 1995).
More knowledge of the transfer of microparticles, including microplastics and nanoplastics,
through biological membranes can also be mined from the drug delivery research literature.
There are ongoing investigations of how the bioavailability and uptake of medicines can be
improved by way of micro- or nano-particulate carriers (e.g. Hussain et al. 2001 for
microplastics and LaVan et al. 2003; De Jong & Borm 2008; Wesselinova 2011 for some
reviews of the emerging field of nanomedicinal applications, including attention to toxicity).
When humans or rodents ingest microplastics (�150 µm) they have been shown to
translocate from the gut to the lymph and circulatory systems (Hussain et al. 2001). Wick et
al. (2010) recently demonstrated how nano-sized polystyrene particles up to 240 µm in
diameter cross the human placenta in placenta perfusion experiments. Synthetic polymers
may in some cases be less harmful than the classic ENPs. In a recent study, coating toxic
carbon nanotubules (a common type of ENP) with a polystyrene-based polymer was tested
with the aim of reducing the cytotoxicity, oxidative stress, and inflammation in an in vivo mice
lung test and an in vitro murine macrophage test (Tabet et al. 2011).
These studies issue a warning that when the size of the microparticle approaches the range
below approximately a quarter of a mm, adverse effects may start to emerge due to particle
interactions with cells and tissues, particle uptake in endosomes, lysosomes, the lymph and
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment42
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 43
circulatory systems and the lungs. These include deleterious effects at cellular level (Berntsen
et al. 2010; Fröhlich et al. 2009) or uptake into placental tissue (Wick et al. 2010) or lymph
and circulatory systems (Hussain et al. 2001; Kato et al. 2003). Smaller particles are
expected to outnumber larger pieces of plastic litter, and reports of microplastics in this size
range in the environment are discussed in Chapter 3 of this report. Human exposure is also a
concern if seafood containing microplastics is consumed (see Tables 4.4 and 4.5).
Chemical toxicity through exposure to microplastics
The toxicity of microplastics potentially arises from the leaching of additives, associated
Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) or monomers (Figure 5.1). No studies to measure
toxicological endpoints addressing the postulated facilitated uptake of sorbed POPs with
ingestion of microplastics have been performed to date. A consortium of researchers
coordinated by Blue Oceans Sciences is currently working on the effects of microplastics on
biofilms, although this work is as yet unpublished (Andrea Neal, pers. comm. and Neal et al.
2010). The sorption of POPs to plastic pellets have been suggested as a plausible
explanation for the elevated levels of well-known toxic chemicals such as polychlorinated
dibenzo-p-dioxins (PCDDs), polychlorinated dibenzofurans (PCDFs), and coplanar
polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) detected in albatross from remote areas of the Pacific
Ocean (Tanabe et al. 2004) and in other seabirds (Ryan et al. 1988; Takada et al. 2006).
Figure 5.1 Partitioning of chemicals between plastics, biota and seawater.
Further toxicity may be expected from toxic monomers. The first paper to demonstrate plastic
(polystyrene) degradation to hazardous monomers at low temperatures such as in seawater
was recently presented (Saido et al. 2009). Polystyrene (PS) was found to decompose at
30°C to produce the styrene monomer, 2,4-diphenyl-1-butene (styrene dimer) and 2,4,6-
triphenyl-1-hexene (styrene trimer). The styrene monomer is well known in human toxicology,
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 43
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
44
causing both acute and chronic effects in humans, including on the central nervous system
(ATSDR 1992). This paper highlighted another new type of contaminant from plastics which
should be surveyed in environmental samples. However, such degradation has yet to be
tested in seawater or under more field-like conditions.
The widely used endocrine disrupting plasticizers dibutyl phthalate, diethylhexyl phthalate,
dimethyl phthalate, butyl benzyl phthalate and bisphenol A (BPA) are toxic to various taxa of
wildlife, even at low concentrations relevant to field exposure levels: in the low ng/L to �g/L
range (Oehlmann et al. 2009), as well as to humans (e.g. Engel et al. 2010). Plasticizers such
as BPA are also well known from the literature and media attention as a human health hazard
leaching from plastic drinking bottles (e.g. Lang et al. 2008; Talsness et al. 2009). BPA is a
monomer of PVC and an example of a chemical that is toxic even at low doses (Vom Saal &
Hughes 2005). Many plastic materials have a tendency to release oestrogenic chemicals,
which are also known to cause adverse health effects especially at low (picomolar,
nanomolar) doses (Yang et al. 2011). Release of substances can proceed by leaching to
aqueous phases (e.g. Sajiki & Yonekubo 2003) or offgassing (e.g. Tuomainen et al. 2006).
While examples of toxic monomers of synthetic polymers do exist, the polymeric forms are
generally inert and biologically inactive. Polymers are not water-soluble, are typically too large
to cross cell membranes and lack functional groups which can interact easily with biological
enzymes or receptors.
There is already quite an extensive body of literature on the toxic effects of many types of
additives, monomers and other auxiliary substances associated with plastic polymers
(especially phthalates, brominated flame retardants, BPA, metals) on biological systems. For
a comprehensive assessment of the hazards associated with microplastics in the marine
environment, the hazards of the chemicals associated with them (including POPs) should be
considered along with their particle toxicities. These toxicity data should be considered in the
hazard assessment of microplastics. Known toxicity data for common additives and
environmental contaminants should be incorporated into hazard assessments of
microplastics.
The hazard posed by microplastics is becoming clearer with research from marine
ecotoxicology, human toxicology and the medical sciences. The hazard remains quite
complex to characterize because of: i) a worldwide lack of dedicated studies to date; ii)
particle toxicity is size- and shape-dependent; ii) particle toxicity is also dependent on the
specific chemical make-up of the microplastic particle (polymer, monomer, additives, sorbed
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment44
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 45
contaminants); iv) the sheer diversity of possible types of microplastics in any given
environmental matrix; v) the diversity of uptake routes and accumulation patterns in vastly
different marine taxa; and vi) the challenges of studying the diversity of potential ecological
effects (e.g. vectors for viruses and invasive species; food chain transfer; biogeochemical
cycle effects, etc). From a regulatory point of view, it is also important to note that
microplastics are clearly persistent, bioaccumulate to various degrees in biota, are potentially
intrinsically toxic (especially due to additives, monomers, particles <<1 mm) and are subject
to long-range transport, notably to the five oceanic gyres.
As shown above, there is an important knowledge gap as to how microplastics adsorbed to or
ingested by marine organisms affect their physiological condition and chemical burdens, and
how these may reduce survival, fitness and reproductive performance, and ultimately affect
their populations. Concerns have been raised about the potential ecological impact of
microplastics as substrates and vectors of the dispersal and introduction of exotic diseases
and alien species (e.g. Bowmer & Kershaw 2010; Zarfl & Matthies 2010). These mechanisms
of microplastics may cause a considerable ecological and economic impact, but knowledge
as to whether and how they pose a significant risk to ecosystems and human health is
lacking. The assessment of population effects of microplastics in the marine environment is
similar to that for chemical compounds, where ecological risk assessment is supported by
results from controlled laboratory studies and semi-field studies (e.g. mesocoms, in situ
experiments) to provide causal evidence and modelling approaches to predict population
effects from sublethal effects (established with biomarkers) in individual organisms (Thain et
al. 2008).
Due to the particle-related properties of microplastics, especially at the <<1 mm or nanoscale,
it is expected that existing models and concepts to describe and predict environmental risks
for the non-macromolecular chemicals do not apply to the intrinsic microplastic particles. A
proper risk assessment for microplastics may be decades away and there is a resemblance
to the issues related to environmental risk assessments for nano-particles and organic
particles. It is believed that many relevant lessons can be learned about microplastics from
the field of nanoparticles and their application to issues concerning fate and transport
modelling and risk assessment methodologies for the aquatic environment.
In 2001 the Dutch government initiated NanoNextNL (www.nanonext.nl), a collaboration
between research institutes and industry that covers most R&D activities on nanotechnology
in the Netherlands. The total investment in NanoNext NL for research in nanotechnology for
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 45
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
46
the period 2010-2014 will be approximately €250 million. €15 Million will be used for
fundamental and applied research projects under the ’environmental risks of nanoparticles’
programme, which aims to understand and predict emission routes, environmental fate
processes, exposure of organisms in the ecosystem, and the environmental and human
toxicity of nanoparticles. Several institutes (e.g. Deltares, WUR, IVM-VU, etc) are contributing
both to NanoNextNL and research on marine microplastics, and synergism can be expected
between these activities.
POPs and microplastics – sorption studies
Interest in the toxicity of POPs and other environmental contaminants has led to
investigations of the interactions between chemicals in the environment and microplastics.
Several studies have identified POPs in plastic fragments and pellets collected from the field
(e.g. Carpenter 1972; Carpenter & Smith 1972; Endo et al. 2005; Mato et al. 2001; Rios et al.
2007). The more hydrophobic chemicals, in particular, have an affinity for plastic polymers
orders of magnitude higher than their affinity for the aqueous phase (Mato et al. 2001; Takada
2006; Teuten et al. 2007). This was demonstrated in Prof. Takada’s Pellet Watch programme
in Japan (Ogata et al. 2009; Takada 2006), where the partitioning coefficient for plastic pellets
found on beaches (which are in fact equilibrating with the air phase when they are on dry
parts of the beach) contain PCB and pesticide concentrations six orders of magnitude higher
than are commonly detected in seawater, or air for that matter (www.pelletwatch.org).
Plastic pellets, macroscopic fragments and microplastic particles contain organic
contaminants such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
(PAHs), petroleum hydrocarbons, organochlorine pesticides, PBDEs, tetrabromobisphenol-A
(TBBP-A), and alkylphenols at concentrations up to the �g/g range (Teuten et al. 2009). For
instance, in a study on four Japanese coasts, Mato et al. (2001) collected polypropylene (PP)
resin pellets and detected concentrations of PCBs between 4 and 117 ng/g, DDE (a
transformation product of the pesticide DDT) between 0.16 and 3.1 ng/g, and nonylphenol
between 0.13 and16 ng/g, depending on the sampling site. It is not uncommon to measure
concentrations of POPs in pellets that are 106 times higher compared to seawater. It would
appear that weathered and freshly emitted plastics have similar affinities for some POPs
(Beckingham 2009). The hydrophobic contaminant phenanthrene was observed to
concentrate in plastic material better than in natural sediments (Teuten et al. 2007). To date,
only a few very classic contaminants have been measured in plastics from the field in this
way.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment46
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 47
The sea surface microlayer is enriched with pollutants from atmospheric deposition11 and
these chemicals will interact with both floating microplastics and plankton in this habitat (Booij
and Van Drooge 2001; Wurl & Obbard 2004). Researchers are now suggesting that plastic
debris acts as a transport medium, as it concentrates the chemicals to levels many orders of
magnitude greater than in other abiotic matrices such as seawater (Figure 5.1). The
phenomenon of chemical partitioning of polar and nonpolar organic chemicals to plastic
polymers is well known from passive sampling studies (e.g. polyacrylate or
polydimethylsiloxane polymers applied in the solid-phase microextraction (SPME) technique
(e.g. Leslie et al. 2002). Due to intermolecular spaces in polymers known as the ‘free volume’,
hydrophobic chemical contaminants may not only simply adsorb to the surfaces of polymers,
but also be absorbed (Mayer et al. 2000). The more free volume, the more rubbery and less
glassy the polymer material tends to be. Combined with the global distribution and mass of
this material, microplastic litter has been suggested as a potentially important player in the
global fate and transport of chemicals (Arthur et al. 2009a; Thompson et al. 2004).
11 In the case of volatile, persistent organic chemicals, long-range transport and atmospheric deposition is one of
the significant routes of transport to the world’s oceans.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 47
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
48
6 Microplastics monitoring: sampling and analytical methods
Considering the pervasiveness of microplastic litter and the range of potential biological
effects as discussed in the previous chapters, it is important to target research to understand
the sources, fate and the scale of impacts of microplastic marine litter. In this chapter we
describe the sampling and analytical methods currently applied and discuss the implications
for monitoring and monitoring programme design, including knowledge from transport and
fate modelling. This is also one of the key subjects that the EU MSFD TSG on Marine Litter is
working on in 2011 (see also Galgani et al. 2010).
Tracking microplastics in the marine environment and assessing the effectiveness of
emissions reduction measures requires reliable, statistically rigorous data on the spatial
distribution and temporal trends, and preferably some information on the composition. To
achieve this, microplastics must be sampled at appropriate selected sites from relevant
matrices, which may include seawater (at given depths), marine sediments, beach sand and
biota. Prior to initiating a monitoring programme, exploratory pilot surveys are normally
carried out. These may identify hotspots or confirm the location of accumulation zones
predicted by model calculations or expert judgement. The Netherlands would benefit from
such a survey particularly in anticipation of upcoming activities related to the MSFD.
To determine temporal trends, relevant matrices should be selected that are responsive to
changes in inputs of microplastics. This is an inherent challenge for the monitoring of
persistent components, as reductions are often not quickly observable. The required
statistical power should also be determined. For example, the monitoring programme might
need the power (e.g. 90%) to detect a change in the concentration of microplastics (e.g. 50%)
in the matrix (e.g. sediments/seawater) over a selected period (e.g. 10 years, although this is
a relatively short period for microplastics with such a long half-life in the sinks of the marine
environment). A great deal of expertise has been developed on the subject of formulating
such quality objectives in existing marine monitoring programmes in Europe for different types
of pollution, including marine litter. The ecological quality objective (EcoQO) for plastic litter in
the stomachs of Northern fulmars set by OSPAR (2008) reads: ’There should be less than
10% of northern fulmars (Fulmarus glacialis) having more than 0.1 g plastic particles in the
stomach in samples of 50 to 100 beach-washed fulmars found in winter.’
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 49
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 49
Any new programme focused on monitoring microplastics should be developed with attention
to the guidelines set out within the framework of other established marine monitoring
programmes such as those of the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, ICES
(ICES 2001), HELCOM, OSPAR and the TSG on Marine Litter. They should where possible
build upon existing monitoring programmes for chemical compounds and their biological
effects (OSPAR 2011).
Our current understanding of particle toxicology and nanotoxicology illuminates the
importance of defining (and recording) the size categories of microplastics monitored. In
toxicological terms, ‘size matters’. In determining the spatial distribution of microplastics in the
marine environment, it is important to bear in mind the following:
Representativeness
To what extent do microplastics measurements reflect the actual environmental situation? A
number of factors may affect the representativeness of microplastics data. For instance, wave
action (Moore et al. 2002; Proskurowski et al. 2010) may affect mixing at the surface layer, in
the vicinity of large river systems from urban areas discharging textile fibres from washing
machines (Browne et al. 2011). In spring many large river systems may carry large amounts
of plastic debris to the sea, as was suggested by Moore et al. (2002), for example. Minimizing
the effects of variation is critical in the sampling design for microplastics.
Comparability
Some work towards standardization of sampling and analytical methods for microplastics has
already been done. This is critical for the establishment of time trends and to track distribution
in the EU’s four seas. Comparability benefits when guidelines and standard operating
procedures are developed. It takes time and experience to build up the knowledge,
experience, observations and expertise necessary to create a comprehensive set of ‘best
practice’. Guided site-selection procedures help ensure comparability.
At the moment, however, it is important to bear in mind that some types of monitoring rely
heavily on best professional judgment and that standard methods may not always be optimal
for assessing microplastics. It will also be very important to monitor emissions at sources.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment50
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
50
Sampling microplastics – methods currently applied
Sampling of microplastics currently targets mainly seawater and sediments, with some
exploratory sampling of beaches and organisms (Chapters 3 and 4), and recent work on
microplastics in rivers (Moore et al. 2011), on river banks (Van Paassen 2010) and in sewage
sludge (Browne et al. 2011). Beach surveys of microplastics are currently not preferred due to
various drawbacks, e.g. temporal trends are difficult to measure if the beach is cleaned of
microplastics in between sampling surveys, as occurs with macroplastics (Ryan et al. 2009).
One hundred percent removal of microplastics from even a small stretch of beach sand using
current methods is extremely time-consuming and ineffective. It is also difficult in some
countries (e.g. Belgium and the Netherlands) to find beach sand that is not disturbed by
recreation between sampling (Claessens et al. 2011). An alternative may be to focus on just
the transect of the beach around the high water line where microplastic particles of a given
size category are sorted by moving water (and wind).
Sampling microplastics in seawater
In seawater, the surface layers are generally targeted for sampling, since high production
volume polymers such as polyethylene are buoyant and other heavier polymers are often
suspended in the top layer similar to other forms of SPM (see Transport Modelling section
below).
The common approach is similar to plankton sampling using nets of various mesh sizes to
filter out particles of a certain size category (Table 6.1). Net methods select a minimum
microplastics size category, e.g. >80 µm (Norén 2008), >330 µm (most other surveys) and
preconcentrate the microplastics in the sample. The smaller the mesh size the more
resistance, which can give problems when towing at sea, or even with the ship’s engine off if
there are strong water currents. However, one advantage of sampling smaller fragment sizes
is that a toxicologically relevant fraction of the macromolecular plastic material is sampled
(particle toxicity). Furthermore, observations to date show that more particles/m3 are found
when a smaller size range is included, stretching the limits of detection in a convenient
direction.
When sampling with nets (Figure 6.1), it is necessary to use a flow meter to calculate the
volume of water that passes through the net if the concentration units in the sample are to be
expressed on a per volume basis such as per m3 (as is the convention with continuous
plankton recorders, see Thompson et al. 2004). Wave action and weather conditions at sea
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 51
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 51
affect the suspension of the microplastic particles, and thus the results of surface water
microplastics sampling. In a recent study in the USA, the quantities of microplastics detected
were different at different wind speeds (Proskurowski et al. 2010). Wind speed is a useful
form of metadata to collect when sampling surface layers of seawater.
Figure 6.1 Manta trawl with flow meter (left); Manta trawl in action (right). Samples in the nets are collected in glass containers, and quantitatively transferred from the net to the container with clean drinking water (not seawater). Onboard ship, seawater microplastics samples may be treated with preservatives. To rid the sample of organic matter, a H2O2 step is sometimes applied. Ridding samples of organic matter is useful when visual inspection is applied to separate polymer material from other materials (Arthur et al. 2009b). Photos H.A. Leslie.
Examples have been given in this report of sampling 10 L volumes of seawater and later
filtering it over a 1.6 µm glass fiber filter to extract microplastics (Ng & Obbard 2006). Norén
(2008) also experimented with sampling 5 L seawater followed by separation on board using
an 80 µm sieve (which would get clogged less easily than the very low µm mesh size). Norén
& Naustoll (2011) also employed a submersible sampling device at 0.1 to 1.5 m.
Standard seawater sampling protocols or guidelines for microplastics have been developed
by NOAA (USA) and Cefas (UK), mostly for internal use by researchers. However, little has
been published so far and nothing is standardized at the moment. It is nevertheless widely
recognized that this is one of the next steps to take in a coordinated effort to characterize
spatial and temporal trends in the water column. Cefas in the UK examined historical samples
phytoplankton recorders (Thompson, Cefas). Some researchers use data reporting units of
particles/water volume (m3) (e.g. Norén 2008), and sometimes in particles/km2 (e.g. Moore et
al. 2002), which makes comparison more complicated. It is nevertheless common to see both
number of particles and mass of particles reported for a given sample.
Sampling expeditions at sea are costly but sampling for microplastics can be combined with
sampling expeditions for many other parameters at very little extra cost.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment52
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
52
Table 6.1 Methods of sampling microplastics from seawater. Type of sampler Lower size limit (µm) Water sampled Reference
Mazur Sampler 330 µm Samples surface water with
flow meter
NOAA, U Tacoma
Washington (USA)
Regular plankton or neuston
nets (continuous plankton
recorders)
330 µm Samples surface water at
10 m depth
U. Plymouth (UK)
Algalita manta trawl 333 µm Samples surface water,
approx. 500 to 3000 m3 per
trawl (normally expressed by
Algalita in km-2)
Algalita (USA), Cefas (UK)
Bongo plankton net 333 µm Samples mid-depth water
column samples
Lattin et al. 2004 (USA)
Epibenthic sled 333 µm Samples water column near
sea bottom
Lattin et al. 2004 (USA)
Plankton net 80 µm Samples surface water 0-0.3
m depth, <1 m3 sample
volume
Norén 2008 (Sweden)
Zooplankton net 450 µm Samples surface water at 0-
0.3 m depth; sampling volume
10 to several 100 m3
Norén et al. 2008 (Sweden)
North Sea Foundation (NL)
Bulk water sampling
followed by filtration
Depends on filter used,
e.g. 1.6 µm glass filter or
80 µm plankton net.
5 - 10 L (0.005 – 0.01 m3) Ng & Obbard 2006
(Singapore); Norén 2008
(Sweden)
Submersible water pump
and filtering apparatus
10 µm filter used with
30-µm supporting filter
0.5 – 1.5 m depth; sampling
volume not specified but
control samples were 25 L of
pure water
Norén & Naustoll 2011
(Skagerrak/North Sea)
Current detection limits for microplastic particles tend to require very large sample intake
volumes (dozens or even hundreds of m3). The current typical sample sizes require filtration
at sea, the samples in Table 6.1 typically representing between 30,000 and 500,000 L of
water (1 m3 water is the equivalent of 1000 L). The number of particles per km2 is higher than
the number of particles in the same trawl when expressed as per m3 because a trawl of 1
km2, taking the surface water down to perhaps 10 cm water depth results in a volume of
100,000 m3, which is the equivalent of 100 million litres – and thus a significantly smaller
numerical value in particles/m3 or particles/L. Increasing the sample volume can increase the
frequency of detection. Still, such surface area-based concentration data requires a
consistent depth of sampling and cannot be compared with volume-based data unless the
depth of sampling is known for data reported per km2. For large floating marine debris such
as macroplastics, the expression of concentrations on a per km2 basis makes sense.
However, when microplastics are being investigated, it may make more sense to express
their concentration based on units of the volume sampled, since microplastics exist not only
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 53
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 53
at the surface but also (due to wave action, neutral buoyancy due to polymer types or biofilm
formations, for example) at all points between the surface and the maximum surface depth of
the trawl (whether it be 10 cm or 30 cm, or another depth).
Sampling microplastics in sediments
Methods of sampling microplastics from submerged sediments are shown in Table 6.2.
Sediments are sampled as for organic contaminants and metals, with attention to
sedimentation rates and sedimentation layers, avoiding disturbed sediment layers, particularly
in temporal trend studies. The widely used technique first described in Thompson et al.
(2004) takes advantage of the density of a saturated salt solution. When salt solution is added
to the sediment sample and a slurry is made, the polymers of low enough density will float to
the surface. The polymers that are still heavier than saturated saline water will not be
retrieved from the sediment sample. The technique is not therefore suitable for nylon, for
example, a heavy polymer that will not float in this solution.
Claessens et al. (2011) slightly modified the method used by Thompson et al. (2004) by
increasing the volume of the sediment sample intake for extraction to 1 kg, to which 3 l of
saturated saline solution was added. After stirring for two minutes, the sediment settled for
one hour and the supernatant was poured through a 38 µm sieve. Filtered material was
examined under a binocular microscope. The levels reported are for microplastics in the size
range 38 µm to 1 mm. Browne et al. (2011) also defined a 1 mm cut-off in the size of
microplastics for their publication, although convention since the First Microplastics Research
Symposium in the USA (Arthur et al. 2009a) has been to define microplastics as <5 mm.
Norén (2008) also modified the method devised by Thompson et al. (2004).
An alternative method is visual inspection of the sediment sample under a microscope, which
is even more time-consuming than examination of the filtrate. Standardization of sediment
sampling methods, as well as the units in which the results are expressed, could aid in the
comparison of sites on a global scale.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment54
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
54
Table 6.2 Methods of sampling microplastics from submerged sediments.
Sediment sampling Method Size range (µm) and units Reference
Sediment sampling at
strandline with small trowel
and from subtidal zone
using an Eckman grab
Mix 250 ml sediment with
saturated salt solution (1.2 kg
NaCl/litter) and filter
supernatant
Depends on the size of sieve used
for filtration of supernatant
Thompson et al.
2004
Eckman1 grab sampling of
top 5 to 10 cm of sediment
surface layer
Mix 100 ml of sediment with
saturated salt solution and
filter supernatant over 2 µm
sieve
Depends on the size of sieve used
for filtration of supernatant; this
study used 2 µm. Units:
particles/100 ml sediment (wet)
Norén 2008
Van Veen grab sampler or
sediment core
Mix 1 kg wet sediment with
saturated NaCl solution and
filter supernatant over 38 µm
sieve
38 µm – 1 mm particles were both
counted and weighed and
expressed and particles/kg dry
sediment.
Claessens et al.
2011
1 The Van Veen grab sampler can be used as an alternative to the Eckman grab
Sampling microplastics in organisms
Only a handful of studies report on the presence and fate of microplastics in marine biota.
These include the sampling and analysis of the gut contents of birds, fish, plankton and also
of faecal matter (Table 6.3). Biota samples were derived from surveys of macroplastic and
microplastics (manta trawl) or dead animals. Microplastics analysis is usually conducted by
microscopic dissection of samples. In a laboratory exposure mussels to microplastics,
fluorescent polystyrene microspheres (beads) were used; gut tissue and haemocytes were
isolated and fixed and subsequent microscopic and histological analyses were performed for
quantification of microplastics. When fibrous microplastics in the stomach contents of
organisms form tight intertwined balls, often mixed with other food items, the determination of
the number of microplastic particles or weight of microplastics becomes more time-consuming
and challenging, as was observed in the case of Nephrops norvegicus (Murray & Cowie
2011).
Another approach to sampling microplastics in organisms is to sample biofilms composed of
organisms which are tinier than microplastics and which use microplastic particle surface as a
substrate – these are also studied using microscopy (e.g. Harrison et al. 2010; Lobelle &
Cunliffe 2011).
To obtain a representative picture of the occurrence and fate of microplastics in marine
organisms, a number of key species in the marine food chain should be sampled and
analyzed. These might include: marine mammals (stranded seals or porpoises), birds
(Norther fulmar corpses), pelagic/demersal fish (derived from fish stock assessment cruises),
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 55
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 55
plankton (derived from routine plankton surveys) and other invertebrates such as lugworm,
mussels and crustaceans. Sampling biota gives a direct measure of their exposure to
microplastics. The ecological relevance of microplastics in biota as well as the biofilm
formation on microplastics is potentially high due to the direct contact between biological
systems and particles, and between biological systems and chemicals leaching from the
particles.
Table 6.3 Methods to sample microplastics from biota.
Species/Target tissue
Size range Methods Reference
Fur seal scat >0.5 mm Field-collected seal scats frozen and later broken apart with
water in a series of two sieves with mesh diameters of 1 mm
and 0.5 mm. Sigma Scan Pro image analysis for
measurement. SEM photos made. Thin slices scanned with
FTIR.
Erikkson &
Burton 2003
Laboratory
mussels
3.0 or 9.6 �m Fluorescent beads were used. Mid-gut tissue and isolated
haemolytes. Histological analysis and imaging techniques
Browne et al.
2008
Planktivorous fish
from the N Pacific
Central Gyre
µm-mm Neuston samples obtained by manta trawl (tows varied from
1.5 to 5.5 h). Samples fixed in 5% formalin, then soaked in
freshwater and transferred to 70% isopropyl alcohol. Fish
stomach was removed and categorized by size, colour and
type using a dissecting microscope and weighed.
Boerger et al.
2010
Fulmars (frozen
corpses)
>1mm Gut content sieved over 1 mm sieve. Smaller sizes were not
included and the sieve often became plugged. Microscopic
inspection.
Franeker et al.
2011
North Sea fish µm-mm Inventory of the presence of plastics in the digestive track. Foekema et al.
2011
Nephrops
norvegicus
µm-mm Stomach contents analysis: mid-guts were removed from 120
animals and set in 0.04% formaldehyde for 24 h before being
transferred to and stored in 70% ethanol. Examination under
light microscope 400x.
Murray & Cowie
2011
Analyzing microplastic
Once environmental samples for microplastics are taken to the laboratory they undergo
various stages of pretreatment and analysis, as described per matrix above. When the
microplastics have been sufficiently separated from the matrix, analysis of the particles
begins (mass of particles, or number of particles per size category, see Table 6.4).
Some techniques allow for identification of the polymer type, such as FT-IR spectroscopy or
RAMAN spectroscopy. RAMAN microscopy combined with imaging techniques in theory
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment56
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
56
offers the chance to detect microplastics down to approx. 1 �m in size, and to perform
polymer analysis and multiple points on the surface of a sample. Thin sample layers are
normally used for Raman and FTIR analyses. If thick layers of samples are to be examined,
‘Deep Raman’ may also provide data for microplastics lying underneath other materials, but
this is a more complicated procedure. Other analyses based on visual examination with light
or electron microscopy cannot be used to determine polymer type. Various imaging
techniques are emerging which may be practical for the visualization of microplastic particles.
Table 6.4 Analytical techniques for microplastics, polymer identification, applications for field monitoring.
The main method of analysis is based on visual inspection after filtration and H2O2 digestion
of organic material (seawater and gut content analysis) or density separation (sediments) or
tissue imaging (biota). The visual inspections are not yet automated and are thus associated
with relatively high costs. FTIR and Raman microscopy are most commonly used in studies
where determination of the polymeric composition is an objective.
Quality control issues such as blanks have been pointed out by Norén & Naustvoll (2011),
who noted background levels of textile fibres in their control samples which were quite near
the concentrations measured in the surface water. They and other sampling teams (such as
in Browne et al. 2011) take precautions by avoiding wearing synthetic clothing during
sampling. It is also important that the microplastics counted by different individuals are
correctly identified as such, since many kinds of particles (e.g. paint, oil products, ash) may
also be present in the sample (Norén & Naustvoll 2011).
FTIR spectroscopy Yes Field or lab samples, all matrices
Raman spectroscopy Yes Field or lab samples, all matrices
Electron microscopy (TEM,
STEM)
No Field or lab samples, research purposes, (not monitoring)
Fluorescence No Microplastics histopathology (Not applicable for field monitoring)
Spectrophotometry No Lab (feeding) studies
Field flow fractionation No More suited to lab studies
Flow cytometry No Lab studies, (experimental work, not monitoring)
Mass spectrometry Yes Lab studies and also to measure chemical contaminants
Coulter Counter No Used to measure microplastics in personal care products (Arthur et
al. 2009c)
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 57
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 57
Transport models to support design of microplastics monitoring
Modelling the transport and fate of microplastics in the Dutch coastal zones and North Sea
area can assist in interpreting microplastics monitoring information and can help link other
monitoring data (for microplastics in rivers, macroplastic litter, manufacturing emissions, etc.)
with the microplastics distributions observed in marine areas.
Given the particle size and various properties such as the buoyancy of some polymers
(Andrady 2011), the ability of some to absorb water in the ‘free volume’ between the polymer
chains (Bashek et al. 1999), and the colonization of microorganisms on their surfaces (e.g.
Harrison et al. 2010; Holmström 1975; Lobelle & Cunliffe 2011), microplastics may behave
similarly to suspended particulate matter (SPM) in marine systems.
A great deal of work has been done on modelling and monitoring SPM in the North Sea by
scientists at Deltares, IVM-VU, etc. (e.g. Blaas et al. 2007; Gerritsen et al. 2000; Van Kessel
et al. 2011). This previous modelling could provide a basis for the development of models to
estimate how microplastics will be transported once emitted from land-based sources (via
rivers, harbours, effluent outlets, wind) or via the gradual fragmentation of macroplastic litter
in the water column or sediments. Horizontal transport in Dutch marine areas will be driven by
both tidal and wind-induced currents. Fettweis et al. (2007) estimated long-term suspended
solids fluxes in the Southern part of the North Sea using a combination of mathematical
models and satellite imagery. Vertical transport in the area will likely be characterized by the
settling velocities of the particles, which is governed by the particle size and density
difference between the particle and surrounding water. Dobrynin et al. (2010) investigated
transport mechanisms of suspended solids, indicating areas that may be subject to erosion or
sedimentation and seasonal differences between calm and storm periods and the relative
importance of waves and currents. In the southwestern part of the North Sea resuspension
dominates and is mainly governed by currents while near the Dogger Bank waves drive the
resuspension process in stormy conditions. In deeper parts of the North Sea sedimentation of
SPM generally dominates.
Gyres leading to the ‘Great Garbage Patch’ phenomenon in the Pacific Ocean, made famous
by the work of Charles Moore and Algalita (http://www.algalita.org/index.php), are not
expected in the North Sea, where most currents are tidal. Eddies do occur in the North Sea
(depending on the coastal contours and other characteristics), but given the tidal currents that
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment58
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
58
dominate in these areas, they are very dynamic and unlikely to capture microplastics and
create local accumulation zones. Eddies emanating from river outflows may have a more
permanent character, which would lead to possible zones of net sedimentation. Whether
these sedimentation zones lead to accumulation of microplastics is at present poorly
understood, and will depend on the settling characteristics of the microplastic particles and
local hydrodynamic conditions.
Important differences between properties of SPM and microplastics may lead to differences in
settling processes between the two. For example, the density of a microplastic particle
(typical polymers have specific gravities between 0.6 and 1.5) is significantly lower than the
density of SPM (about 2.6, i.e. about the same as rock). Microplastic materials may be
buoyant with a specific gravity of less than 1, neutral (approximately 1) or negatively buoyant
(greater than 1) and tend to sink. Modelling of microplastics will need to account for this range
of buoyancy. Considering the relatively small density difference between marine waters and
plastics, density stratification of microplastics is expected to occur, distributing the denser
particles deeper in the water column, with the lighter particles in the upper layers. Since
transport mechanisms may differ as a function of depth, three-dimensional resolution of these
processes is required.
The second main difference between microplastics and SPM is that SPM concentrations are
significantly higher and easier to detect. Compared to SPM, microplastics fluxes will be
significantly lower and it is highly likely that the outcome of the models will be more sensitive
to the model settings (parameters) and plastic input fluxes, such as river sources. It is
important that the sources of microplastics entering the North Sea are well monitored,
allowing examination of the relative contribution of land-based sources and sources outside
the North Sea (such as the Atlantic), fragmentation of macroplastic litter to microplastics, and
sinks (settling/uptake by organisms). To some extent, this is similar to the analysis by Zarfl &
Matthies (2010), who examined pollutant fluxes (dissolved or absorbed to plastics) from the
North Atlantic into the Arctic and estimated the main contributing factors such as currents and
atmospheric transport.
Due to the relatively low microplastics concentrations expected (commonly between approx.
0.05 and 20 particles/m3, apart from hotspots where concentrations can be 100,000
particles/m3, see Chapter 3) and high levels of uncertainty in stochastic modelling
approaches, deterministic modelling may need to be adopted. Several options are available,
such as data model integration techniques (e.g. Kalman filtering), Monte Carlo approaches or
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 59
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 59
other data assimilation techniques that are also used in suspended solids transport modelling
(e.g. Dobrynin et al. 2008). Probabilistic methods may also be considered, similar to
Maximenko et al. (2011), for example, who used drifter modelling to identify accumulation
zones.
Characteristics of microplastics may also vary over time, for example due to changes in size
(degradation) or growth of biofilms on the particles, changing their bulk density (Harrison et al.
2010; Lobelle & Cunliffe 2011; Ye & Andrady 1991). A significant mass balance discrepancy
between sources and observed and/or modelled concentrations points to a lack of
understanding of fluxes and processes. Additional monitoring and/or modelling will then be
needed to enhance our understanding and reduce this discrepancy.
A number of river systems discharge large quantities of water and SPM into the North Sea,
such as the Rhine/Meuse and the Thames. They are likely to carry a significant fraction of
macro- and microplastics into the North Sea region and hence any hotspots are likely to be
associated with one or more of these sources (see also Van Paassen 2010). An example of
SPM distribution from satellite images (Figure 6.2) clearly illustrates the effect of the Thames
River in the UK emitting SPM to the North Sea flowing in a northeasterly direction (Blaas et al.
2007). Along the Dutch coast the residual current also flows towards the northeast. Any SPM,
including microplastics, from the Rhine may travel in the direction of the Wadden Sea, for
example, making this a suitable area for monitoring in the Dutch marine environment.
The objectives of any future North Sea survey or monitoring programme may be to select
microplastics sampling sites in zones where high and low microplastics accumulation rates
are expected. Transport models such as those modelling SPM (e.g. Van Kessel et al. 2011)
can help in determining these zones. No transport models dealing specifically with
microplastics transport in the North Sea (including the Wadden Sea) exist and should
therefore be developed. If sensitive species are identified in biological effects studies, e.g. fish
larvae, microplastics could also be measured in key foraging zones etc.
Existing three-dimensional models show us the relative contribution of each river (as a water
fraction) and boundary is potentially known for the entire North Sea region. If estimates of
microplastics loads from these rivers and boundaries exist, this will give us an initial estimate
of the importance of these contributions. If, for example, boundaries provide the main source,
then this already points to a wider scale issue that cannot be resolved by local measures.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment60
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
60
It is clear that modelling would need to be carried out in phases, starting from a mass balance
perspective and evolving towards more complex process descriptions. Models provide an
understanding of where additional empirical data are needed to allow more accurate
estimates of microplastics fluxes and concentrations. Existing modelling suites, such as
Delft3D, provide a good basis for developing a microplastics transport and fate model for the
North Sea. Process descriptions that explain the fate of microplastics are likely to be needed,
given the complexity of the issue.
Figure 6.2 MODIS Terra recording of the colour of the southern North Sea, March 26, 2007.
The yellow-greenish colours in are due to suspended particulate matter, algae and dissolved organic matter.
(Image courtesy MODIS Rapid Response Project NASA/GSFC).
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 61
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 61
7 Expert dialogue – Summary and key outcomes
An important element of the inventory and factfinding exercise is testing the results presented
in the report against the knowledge of experts in the Netherlands and neighbouring countries.
The report’s authors have participated in dialogues with expert stakeholders concerned with
microplastics in different national and international fora over the past few years, and it was
agreed that an expert dialogue based on the draft report findings would provide input into the
report and might lead to a more harmonized (Dutch) standpoint on the status and needs
assessment of the issue of microplastics in the marine environment.
On 26 September 2011, a group of nearly 30 experts from science, the plastics industry,
consultancies, government and non-governmental organisations from the Netherlands, the
UK and Belgium met in Utrecht to discuss aspects of the microplastic issue brought up in this
report (see Appendix E for participants list). A draft version of the present report was received
by participants with great interest. The report was briefly presented by the authors and then
discussed with participants in the plenary session. Microplastic mind mapping in four smaller
groups with reporting back to the main group provided the chance for further input from
participants.
It was reiterated by the group that microplastics is a major, complex and global environmental
problem that could have significant adverse effects on the environment and on humans.
While the problems and solutions are certainly global, it was also recognized that there
always remains a local component - in both the problem and the solution - that should be
addressed too. There was unanimous agreement among participants from the diverse
organisations represented in the dialogue that microplastics do not belong in the marine
environment and should be prevented. Many of the participants’ organisations have already
been contributing in various ways to efforts to solve the microplastic environmental issue.
There was general agreement that attention should focus on reducing the impact of both the
plastic particles themselves and the chemical substances that make up plastic products or
which later sorb to the products after they become litter. This acknowledged the fact that
adverse effects on individual organisms may occur through both particle (and fiber) toxicity
(well-known from PM10, asbestos and nanotoxicity examples), and chemical toxicity when
substances leach out of microplastic (well-known from studies of POPs and many other
chemical toxicants). The suspected hazard of microplastics that emerged from the discussion
of human and mammalian studies cited in this report were of concern to participants and
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 63
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
62
considered relevant to the marine microplastics problem. The importance of experimental
research into adverse effects and risks was also underlined. It was also noted that a
complicating factor when addressing microplastics with the definition of ‘< 5 mm’ one must
deal with a large range of different toxicities that could arise at the different size categories. A
4 mm particle will likely have very different type of impact on a living organism (or population,
or community) than a particle that is 4 µm or 4 nm, which may or may not be easy to describe
in classical ecotoxicological terms. The concerns about effects were considered linked to
public perception of the problem, but work should be done to back up this perception with
scientific facts. More field research, including effects studies, was called for in order to identify
the nature and scale of the problem in the North Sea.
It is widely recognized that indicators in particular for microplastic litter must be further
developed for the implementation of the MSFD. In terms of abiotic matrices which should be
targeted for sampling, sediments were identified as a probable microplastic sink, with next
highest concentrations expected in surface water, followed by intermediate depths in the
water column. Suitable biotic indicator species should be selected to give meaningful signals
about the general ecological health of a food chain, community or ecosystem, if possible.
Experts recommended attention be paid to riverine systems (as one key land-based source of
marine microplastics). It was suggested that an integration of the WFD12 and the MSFD could
increase the impact of mitigation measures, since rivers transport microplastic to the sea.
From the group discussions the recommendation emerged that marine microplastic reduction
measures should be initiated without delay. The question arose as to how much knowledge
do we need before we starting an action and implementing a measure? Not waiting until full
scientific evidence becomes available and a future consensus is reached regarding the
degree of harm to the public or the environment is in line with the precautionary principle as
well as with the ambitions of the participants to prevent microplastic in the marine
environment. Furthermore, there is a very tight time schedule for generating information and
achieving GES under the MSFD. The discussions inspired stakeholders at different points
during the day to call for solutions to the microplastics problem and ideas about points in the
system to target for mitigation actions. Where to begin? Although solutions were outside the
scope of the report and assignment, it illustrates the prevailing ambition to curb the current
emission trends for various reasons. Participants summarized the four key subjects they felt
12 However, the WFD is mainly focused on 33 priority substances – not including microplastic or any sort of litter -
in freshwater and in principle also narrow coastal zones
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment64
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 63
more information needs to be collected on as follows: microplastic sources, occurrence,
effects and solutions.
The participants regard OSPAR as a good platform for further developments and guidance
but also very much supported the proposal to establish a regional expert group on
microplastic litter along with neighbouring countries.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 65
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
64
Epilogue
Marine microplastics and the ‘plastic soup’ problem form an extremely complex issue.
Devising reliable methods to sample, analyse, monitor time trends and effects of
microplastics as discussed in this report is an important but small part of the overall
challenge. Cleaning up the marine litter ‘soup’ after it has been made and served to the
oceans of the world appears to be neither cost-effective nor energy-efficient. For
microplastics, cost-ineffective remediation measures do not even exist. Experts tend to agree
that the main focus should be on emission prevention measures, as with many other
pollutants in water and air. Our 21st century global society already recognizes it needs to
transition to more sustainable consumption and production of plastics, doing more with less.
This will require technological advances in greener feedstock selection and production
processes, product ecodesign, a lengthier service life for polymer products, green chemistry
alternatives for toxic additives, recycling, eliminating superfluous plastic packaging etc. The
plastics cycle needs to be closed and pollutant emissions (of polymers but also monomers,
catalysts, additives and auxiliary chemical substances) need to be reduced or eliminated
throughout the plastics production chain and life cycle. We also should try to avoid path
dependence on unsustainable technological developments. These technological advances
are less complex and unpredictable than the social, economic and political adaptations that
will accompany, co-evolve with and direct them.
Working towards both global and local solutions for the microplastics (and other marine litter)
problem can be synergistically combined with work towards solving a range of other issues
such as reducing CO2 emissions and ocean acidification, improving recycling infrastructure,
replacing hazardous substances with safe ones, moving towards more sustainable
consumption of goods etc. (also see Thompson et al. 2011). Past experience and learning
through solving complex problems have demonstrated that some of the most effective
solutions may turn out to be the counterintuitive ones (Meadows 1999). It will be important in
approaching this issue to resist clinging to preferred paradigms, and instead adopt a spirit of
openness and a willingness to work very hard.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 67
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 65
Acknowledgements
The Dutch Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment (I&M) is acknowledged for sponsoring
this project. The project was supervised by Lex Oosterbaan, Christa Licher, Sandra van der
Graaf and Kees den Herder (Ministry of I&M). We are grateful to Christiana Boerger of the
Algalita Foundation, USA, for kindly providing photographs for the report. Thanks to Remi
Laane (Deltares) and Bert van Hattum (IVM-VU) for their valuable comments on the draft
report. To José Reinders and Lybrich van der Linden of Deltares, many thanks for the support
on the report and workshop. And finally, thanks to all who contributed their ideas in the expert
dialogue.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment68
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
66
References
Ajayan, P.M., Tour, J.M., 2007. Nanotube composites. Nature 447,1066-1068.
Andrady, A.L., 2011. Microplastics in the marine environment. Mar Pollut Bull 62, 1596-1605.
Andrady, A.L., Neal, M.A., 2009. Applications and societal benefits of plastics. Philos T Roy
Soc B 364, 1977-1984.
Anon., 2011. Plastics – the Facts: An analysis of European plastics production, demand and
recovery for 2010. Joint publication of PlasticsEurope, EuPC, EuPR and EPRO. 31
pp.
Arthur, C.D., Baker, J., Bamford, H., (eds.), 2009a. Proceedings of the International Research
Workshop on the Occurrence, Effects, and Fate of Microplastic Marine Debris.
September 9-10, 2008; Tacoma, WA. NOAA Technical Memorandum NOS-OR&R-
30.
Arthur, C.D., Baker, J.E., Masura, J., Leigh, P., Jennings, H., Laroque, C., Foster, G.D.
Bamford, H.A., 2009b. Abundance and distribution of microplastic debris entering the
marine environment from the United States. Setac 30th North America Meeting, New
Orleans, USA, 19-23 November 2009.
Arthur, C.D., Opfer, S.E., Bamford, H.A., 2009c. Standardization of field methods for
collection of microplastic marine debris: pelagic, shoreline, and sediment protocols.
Setac 30th North America Meeting, New Orleans, USA, 19-23 November 2009.
Astudillo, J.C., Bravo, M., Dumont, C.P., Thiel, M., 2009. Detached aquaculture buoys in the
SE Pacific: potential dispersal vehicles for associated organisms. Aquat Biol 5, 219-
23.
ATSDR - Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 1992. Toxicological Profile for
Styrene. US Public Health Service, US Dept of Health and Human Services Atlanta,
GA.
Azzarello, M.Y., Van Vleet, E.S., 1987. Marine birds and plastic pollution. Mar Ecol Prog
Series 37, 295-303.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 69
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 67
Baker, J.E., Foster, G.D., Masura, J., 2010. Laboratory methods for the analysis of
microplastics in the marine environment. Draft document of the Center for Urban
Waters, University of Washington, Tacoma, WA and Department of Chemistry and
Biochemistry, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA, USA.
Barnes, D.K.A., Milner P., 2005. Drifting plastic and its consequences for sessile organism
dispersal in the Atlantic Ocean. Mar Biol 146, 815-825.
Barnes, D.K.A., Galgani, F., Thompson, R.C., Barlaz, M., 2009. Accumulation and
fragmentation of plastic debris in global environments. Philos T Roy Soc B 364,
1985-1998.
Bashek, G., Hartwig, G., Zahradnik, F., 1999. Effect of water absorption in polymers at low
and high temperatures. Polymer 40, 3433-3441.
Beaumont, N.J., Austen, M.C., Atkins, J.P., Burdon, D., Degraer, S., Dentinho, T.P., Derous,
S., Holm, P., Horton, T., Van Ierland, E., Marboe, A.H., Starkey, D.J., Townsend, M.,
Zarzycki, T., 2007. Identification, definition and quantification of goods and services
provided by marine biodiversity: Implications for the ecosystem approach. Mar Pollut
Bull 54, 253-265.
Beckingham, B., 2009. Assessing the partitioning of hydrophobic organic contaminants to
weathered microplastics. Setac 30th North America Meeting, New Orleans, USA, 19-
23 November 2009.
Berntsen, P., Park, C.Y., Rothen-Rutishauser, B., Tsuda, A., Sager, T.M., Molina, R.M.,
Donaghey, T.C., Alencar, A.M., Kasahara, D.I., Ericsson, T., Millet, E.J., Swenson, J.,
Tschumperlin, D.J., Butler, J.P., Brain, J.D., Fredberg, J.J., Gehr, P., Zhou, E.H.,
2010. Biomechanical effects of environmental and engineered particles on human
airway smooth muscle cells. J R Soc Interface 7, S331-S340.
Bhattacharya, P., Lin, S., Turner, J.P., Pu, C.K., 2010. Physical adsorption of charged plastic
nanoparticles affects algal photosynthesis. Phys Chem C 114, 16556-16561.
Blaas, M., El Serafy, G.Y.H., Van Kessel, T., De Boer, G.J., Eleveld, M.A., Van der Woerd
H.J., 2007. Data model integration of SPM transport in the Dutch coastal zone.
Proceedings of the Joint 2007 EUMETSAT / AMS Conference.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment70
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
68
Boerger, C.M., Lattin, G.L., Moore, S.L., Moore, C.J., 2010. Plastic ingestion by planktivorous
fishes in the North Pacific Central Gyre. Mar Pollut Bull 60, 2275-2278.
Bolgar, M., Hubball, J., Groeger, J., Meronek, S., 2008. Handbook for the chemical analysis
of plastic and polymer additives. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, USA. 481 pp.
Booij, K., Van Drooge, B.L., 2001. Polychlorinated biphenyls and hexachlorobenzene in
atmosphere, sea-surface microlayer, and water measured with semi-permeable
membrane devices (SPMDs). Chemosphere 44, 91-98.
Bowmer, T., Kershaw, P., (eds.), 2010. Proceedings of the GESA microplastic international
workshop on micro-plastic particles as a vector in transporting persistent, bio-
accumulating and toxic substances in the oceans. 28-30 June 2010, UNESCO-IOC,
Paris, 69 pp.
Brillant, M.G.S., MacDonald, B.A., 2000. Postingestive selection in the sea scallop
Placopecten magellanicus (Gmelin): the role of particle size and density. J Exp Mar
Biol Ecol 253, 211-227.
Brillant, M.G.S., MacDonald, B.A., 2002. Postingestive selection in the sea scallop
(Placopecten magellanicus) on the basis of chemical properties of particles. Mar Biol
141, 457-465.
Brown, D.M., Wilson, M.R., MacNee, W., Stone, V., Donaldson, K., 2001. Size-dependent
pro-inflammatory effects of ultrafine polystyrene particles: a role for surface area and
oxidative stress in the enhanced activity of ultrafines. Toxicol Appl Pharmacol 175,
191-199.
Browne, M.A., Galloway, T.S., Thompson, R.C., 2007. Microplastic - an emerging
contaminant of potential concern? IEAM 3, 559-561.
Browne, M.A., Dissanayake, A., Galloway, T.S., Lowe, D.M., Thompson, R.C., 2008. Ingested
microscopic plastic translocates to the circulatory system of the mussel, Mytilus
edulis (L). Environ Sci Technol 42, 5026-5031.
Browne, M.A., Galloway, T.S., Thompson, R.C., 2010. Spatial patterns of plastic debris along
estuarine shorelines. Environ Sci Technol 44, 3404-3409.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 71
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 69
Browne, M.A., Crump, P., Niven, S.J., Teuten E.L., Tonkin, A., Galloway T., Thompson, R.C.,
2011. Accumulations of microplastic on shorelines worldwide: sources and sinks.
Environ Sci Technol 45, 9175-9179.
Carpenter, E.J., Smith, K.L., 1972. Plastics on the Sargasso Sea surface. Science 175, 1240-
1241.
Carpenter, E.J., Anderson, S.J., Harvey, G.R., Miklas, H.P., Peck, B.B., 1972. Polystyrene
spherules in coastal waters. Science 178, 749-750.
Claessens, M., De Meester, S., Van Landuyt, L., De Clerck, K., Janssen, C.R., 2011.
Occurrence and distribution of microplastics in marine sediments along the Belgian
coast. Mar Pollut Bull 62, 2199-2204.
Colton, J.B., Knapp, F.D., Burns, B.R., 1974. Plastic particles in surface waters of the
Northwestern Atlantic. Science 185, 491-497.
Day, R.H., Shaw D.G., 1987. Patterns in the abundance of pelagic plastic and tar in the North
Pacific Ocean, 1976-1985. Mar Pollut Bull 18, 311-316.
De Jong, W.H., Borm, P.J., 2008. Drug delivery and nanoparticles: applications and hazards.
Int J Nanomed 3,133-49.
De Vreede, B., Zeddeman, A., Adamczyk, V., Brito, I., Aberson, K., Meddens, L., Denayer,
M., 2010. Plastic Soup: Mapping the first steps towards solutions. Wageningen
University MSc Student research group report, commissioned by Oost NV 103 pp.
http://beagleplasticsoep.files.wordpress.com/2010/04/plastic_soup_mapping_the_firs
t_steps_towards_solutions.pdf
Derraik, J.G.B., 2002. The pollution of the marine environment by plastic debris: a review.
Mar Pollut Bull 44, 842-852.
Dobrynin, M., Günther, H., Gayer, G., 2008. Assimilation of satellite data in a suspended
particulate matter transport model, US/EU-Baltic International Symposium: Ocean
Observations, Ecosystem-Based Management and Forecasting - Provisional
Symposium Proceedings, US/EU-Baltic International Symposium 2008.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment72
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
70
Dobrynin, M., Gayer, G., Pleskachevsky, A., Günther, H., 2010. Effect of waves and currents
on the dynamics and seasonal variations of suspended particulate matter in the North
Sea. J Mar Syst 82, 1-20.
Dockery, D.W., Pope, C.A., 1994. Acute respiratory effects of particulate air pollution. Ann
Rev Pub Health 15 107-132.
Drimal, P., Hrncirik J., Hoffmann J., 2006. Assessing aerobic biodegradability of plastics in
aqueous environment by GC-analyzing composition of equilibrium gaseous phase. J
Polym Environ 14, 309-316.
Dufault, S., Whitehead, H., 1994. Floating marine pollution in ‘the Gully’ on the continental
slope, Nova Scotia, Canada. Mar Pollut Bull 28, 489-493.
Edwards, M., Beaugrand, G., Johns, D.G., Helaouet, P., Licandro, P., McQuatters-Gollop, A.,
Wootton, M., 2011. Ecological Status Report: results from the CPR survey
2009/2010. SAHFOS Technical Report, 8, 1-8. Plymouth, U.K., ISSN 1744-0750.
Endo, S., Takizawa, R., Okuda, K., Takada, H., Chiba, K., Kanehiro, H., Ogi, H., Yamashita,
R., Date, T., 2005. Concentration of polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in beached
resin pellets: variability among individual particles and regional differences. Mar
Pollut Bull 50, 1103-1114.
Engel, S.M., Miodovnik, A., Canfield, R.L., Zhu, C., Silva, M.J., Calafat, A.M., Wolff, M.S.,
2010. Prenatal phthalate exposure is associated with childhood behavior and
executive functioning. Environ Health Perspect 118, 565-571.
Eriksson, C., Burton, H., 2003. Origins and biological accumulation of small plastic particles in
fur seals from Macquarie Island. Ambio 32, 380-384.
Ewalts, D., Smidt, P., Poelman, D., Pennings, P., 2010. Rapport Kostenonderzoek zwerfafval
Nederland. Deloitte Touche Tohmatsu, Den Haag, 100 pp.
Fendall, L.S., Sewall, M.A., 2009. Contributing to marine pollution by washing your face:
Microplastics in facial cleansers. Mar Pollut Bull 58, 1225-1228.
Fettweis, M., Nechad, B., Vandeneynde, D., 2007. An estimate of the suspended particulate
matter (SPM) transport in the southern North Sea using SeaWiFS images, in situ
measurements and numerical model results. Cont Shelf Res 27, 1568-1583.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 73
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 71
Foekema, E., Mergia, M.T., Kotterman, M., van Franeker, J.A., Murk, A.J., Koelman, A.A.,
2011. Inventory of the presence of plastics in the digestive track of North Sea fishes.
Setac poster presentation. Setac Europe Annual Meeting, Milan, Italy, 15-19 May
2011.
Fröhlich, E., Samberger, C., Kueznik, T., Absenger, M., Roblegg, E., Zimmer, A., Pieber,
T.R., 2009. Cytotoxicity of nanoparticles independent from oxidative stress. J Toxicol
Sci 34, 363-375.
Fry, D.M., Fefer, S.I., Sileo, L., 1987. Ingestion of plastic debris by Laysan albatrosses and
wedge-tailed shearwaters in the Hawaiian-Islands. Mar Pollut Bull 18, 339-343.
Galgani, F., Leaute, J.P., Moguedet, P., Souplet, A., Verin, Y., Carpentier, A., Goraguer, H.,
Latrouite, D., Andral, B., Cadiou, Y., Mahe, J.C., Poulard, J.C., Nerisson, P., 2000.
Litter on the sea floor along European coasts. Mar Pollut Bull 40, 516-527.
Galgani, F., Fleet, D., Van Franeker, J., Katsanevakis, S., Maes, T., Mouat, J., Oosterbaan,
L., Poitou, I., Hanke, G., Thompson, R., Amato, E., Birkun, A. , Janssen, C., 2010.
Ed: N. Zampoukas Marine Strategy Framework Directive Task Group 10 Report
Marine Litter April 2010.
Gerritsen, H., Vos, R. J., Kaaij, T.V.D., Lane, A., Boon, J.G., 2000. Suspended sediment
modelling in a shelf sea (North Sea). Coast Eng 41, 317-352.
Gilfillan, L., Ohman, M.D., Doyle, M.J., Watson, W., 2009. Occurrence of plastic micro-debris
in the Southern California current system. California Coop Fish Investig Rep 50, 123-
133.
Glackin, M.M., Dunnigan, J.H., 2009. Marine Debris Program 2007-2008 Accomplishments
Report. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 12 pp.
Goldberg, E.D., 1997. Plasticizing the seafloor: an overview. Environ Technol 18, 195-202.
Goossens, J., 2009. Plastic Soep, Leminscaat publishers, the Netherlands.
Gorycka, M., 2009. Environmental risks of microplastics. MSc thesis, Institute for
Environmental Studies, VU University, Amsterdam, the Netherlands. 171 pp.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment74
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
72
Gouin, T., Roche, N., Lohmann, R., Hodges, G., 2011. A thermodynamic approach for
assessing the environmental exposure of chemicals absorbed to microplastic.
Environ Sci Technol 45, 1466-1472.
Graham, E.R., Thompson, J.T., 2009. Deposit- and suspension-feeding sea cucumbers
(Echinodermata) ingest plastic fragments. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 368, 22-29.
Gregory, M.R., 1996. Plastic “scrubbers” in hand cleansers: a further (and minor) source for
marine pollution identified. Mar Pollut Bull 32, 867-871.
Gregory, M.R., 1999. Plastics and South Pacific Island shores: environmental implications.
Ocean Coast Manag 42, 603-615.
Gregory, M.R., Andrady, A.L., 2003. Plastics in the marine environment. In Plastics and the
environment (ed. A.L. Andrady), pp. 379–402. New York, NY: Wiley.
Hall, K., 2000. Impacts of marine debris and oil: Economic and social costs to coastal
communities. 124 pp. www.kimointernational.org/Portals/0/Files/Karensreport.pdf
Harrison, J.P., Ojeda, J., Sapp, M., Schratzberger, M., Osborn, A.M., 2010. The formation
and structure of microbial biofilms associated with synthetic microplastics in coastal
sediments. SGM Spring Meeting, Edinburgh, UK, 29 March-1 April 2010.
Hesterberg, T.W., Long, C.M., Lapin, C.A., Hamade, A.K., Valberg, P.A., 2010. Diesel
exhaust particulate (DEP) and nanoparticle exposures: what do DEP human clinical
studies tell us about potential human health hazards of nanoparticles? Inhal Toxicol
22, 679-694.
Hinojosa, I.A., Thiel, M., 2009. Floating marine debris in fjords, gulfs and channels of
southern Chile. Mar Pollut Bull 58, 341-350.
Holmström, A., 1975. Plastic films on the bottom of the Skagerrak. Nature 255, 622-623.
Hopwood, D., Spiers, E.M., Ross, P.E., Anderson, J.T., McCullough, J.B., Murray, F.E., 1995.
Endocytosis of fluorescent microspheres by human oesophageal epithelial cells:
comparison between normal and inflamed tissue. Gut 37, 598-602.
Hussain, N., Jaitley, V., Florence, A.T., 2001. Recent advances in the understanding of
uptake of microparticulates across the gastrointestinal lymphatics. Adv Drug Deliver
Rev 50, 107-142.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 75
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 73
ICES, 2001. ICES Working Group on Statistical Aspects of Environmental Monitoring 2001/2
http://www.ices.dk/workinggroups/ViewWorkingGroup.aspx?ID=106
Ivar do Sul, J.A., Costa, M.F., 2007. Marine debris review for Latin America and the wider
Caribbean Region: from the 1970 until now and where do we go from here. �Mar
Pollut Bull 54, 1087-1104.
Kato, T., Yashiro, T., Murata, Y., Herbert, D.C., Oshikawa, K., Bando, M., Ohno, S.,
Sugiyama, Y., 2003. Evidence that exogenous substances can be phagocytized by
alveolar epithelial cells and transported into blood capillaries. Cell Tissue Res 311,
47-51.
Lang, I.A., Galloway, T.S., Scarlett, A., Henley, W.E., Depledge, M., Wallace, R.B., Melzer,
D., 2008. Association of urinary bisphenol A concentration with medical disorders and
laboratory abnormalities in adults. JAMA 300, 1303-1310.
Lattin, G.L., Moore, C.J., Zellers, A.F., Moore, S.L., Weisberg, S.B., 2004. A comparison of
neustonic plastic and zooplankton at different depths near the southern California
shore. Mar Pollut Bull 49, 291-294.
LaVan, D.A., McGuire, T., Langer, R., 2003. Small-scale systems for in vivo drug delivery.
Nature Biotechnol 21, 1184-1191.
Lavender Law, K.L., Moet-Ferguson, S., Maximenko, N.A., Prodkurowski, G., Peacock, E.E.,
Hafner, J., Reddy, C.M., 2010. Plastic accumulation in the North Atlantic Subtropical
Gyre. Science 329, 1185-1188.
Law, R., Hanke, G., Angelidis, M., Batty, J., Bignert, A., Dachs, J., Davies, I., Denga, Y.,
Duffek, A., Herut, B., Hylland, K., Lepom, P., Leonards, P., Mehtonen, J., Piha, H.,
Roose, P., Tronczynski, J., Velikova, V., Vethaak, D., 2010. Marine Strategy
Framework Directive Task Group 8 Report Contaminants and pollution effects. Joint
Report prepared under the Administrative Arrangement between JRC and DG ENV
(no 31210 – 2009/2010), the Memorandum of Understanding between the European
Commission and ICES managed by DG MARE, and JRC’s own institutional funding
Editor: H. Piha EUR 24335 EN – 2010.
Leslie, H.A., Ter Laak, T.L., Oosthoek, A.J.P., Busser, F.J.M., Kraak, M.H.S., Hermens,
J.L.M., 2002. Biomimetic solid-phase microextraction to predict body residues and
toxicity of chemicals that act by narcosis. Environ Toxicol Chem 21, 229-234.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment76
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
74
Lithner, D., Damberg, J., Dave, G., Larsson, Å., 2009. Leachates from plastic consumer
products – Screening for toxicity with Daphnia magna. Chemosphere 74, 1195-1200.
Lithner, D., 2011. Environmental and health hazards of chemicals in plastic polymers and
products. Ph.D. thesis Department of Plant and Environmental Sciences University of
Gothenburg, Sweden. 47 pp.
Lobelle, D., Cunliffe, M., 2011. Early microbial biofilm formation on marine plastic debris. Mar
Pollut Bull 62, 197-200.
Marine Strategy Framework Directive. 2008. European Union directive 2008/56/EC.
Mascarenhas, R., Santos, R., Zeppelini, D., 2004. Plastic debris ingestion by sea turtle in
Paraiba, Brazil. Mar Pollut Bull 49, 354-355.
Mato, Y., Isobe, T., Takada, H., Kanehiro, H., Ohtake, C., Kaminuma, T., 2001. Plastic resin
pellets as a transport medium for toxic chemicals in the marine environment. Environ
Sci Technol 35, 318-324.
Maximenko, N., Hafner, J., Niiler, P., in press. Pathways of marine debris derived from
trajectories of Lagrangian drifters. Mar Pollut Bull.
Mayer, P., Vaes, W.H., Hermens, J.L., 2000. Absorption of hydrophobic compounds into the
poly(dimethylsiloxane) coating of solid-phase microextraction fibres: high partition
coefficients and fluorescence microscopy images. Anal Chem 72, 459-64.
McDermid, K.J., McMullen, T.L., 2004. Quantitative analsysis of small-plastic debris on
beaches in the Hawaiian archipelago. Mar Pollut Bull 48, 790-794.
Meadows, D., 1999. Leverage points: Places to intervene in a system. Sustainability Institute
Report. Hartland, VT, USA. 19 pp.
Moore, C.J., Moore, S.L., Leecaster, M.K., Weisberg, S.B., 2001. A comparison of plastic and
plankton in the North Pacific central gyre. Mar Pollut Bull 42, 1297-1300.
Moore, C.J., Moore, S.L., Weisberg, S.B., Lattin, G.L., Zellers, A.F., 2002. A comparison of
neustonic plastic and zooplankton abundance in southern California’s coastal waters.
Mar Pollut Bull 44, 1035-1038.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 77
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 75
Moore, C.J., 2008. Synthetic polymers in the marine environment: A rapidly increasing, long-
term threat. Environ Res 108,131-139.
Moore, C.J., Lattin, G.L., Zellers, A.F., 2011. Quantity and type of plastic debris flowing from
two urban rivers to coastal waters and beaches of Southern California. J Integr Coast
Zone Manag 11, 65-73.
Morét-Ferguson, S., Lavender Law, K.L., Proskurowski, G., Murphy, E.K., Peacock, E.E.,
Reddy, C.M., 2010. The size, mass and composition of plastic debris in the western
North Atlantic Ocean. Mar Pollut Bull 60, 1873-1878.
Mouat, J., Lopez Lozano, R., Bateson, H., 2010. Economic Impacts of Marine Litter. KIMO
International Report. 117 pp.
Mulder, K.R., 1998. Sustainable consumption and production of plastics? Technol Forecast
Soc 58, 105-124.
Murray, P.R., Cowie, P.R., 2011. Plastic contamination in the decapod crustacean Nephrops
norvegicus (Linnaeus, 1758). Mar Pollut Bull 62, 1207-1217.
National Research Council, 2008. Tackling marine debris in the 21st century. Washington DC
www.nap.edu. 206 pp.
Neal, A., Randall, M., Figueroa, D., Gonsior, M., Gassel, M., Coleman, H., Argyropoulos, N.,
Hume, C., Steuerman, D., Leftwich, B., 2010. Novel techniques and methods for
characterization of environmental pre-production resin pellets. Second International
Research Workshop on Microplastic Debris, Center for Urban Waters, Tacoma,
Washington, USA. Nov 5-6, 2010.
Ng, K.L., Obbard, J.P., 2006. Prevalence of microplastics in Singapore’s coastal marine
environment. Mar Pollut Bull 52, 761-767.
Norén, F., 2008. Small plastic particles in coastal Swedish waters. N-Research report,
commissioned by KIMO Sweden. 11 pp.
Norén, F., Naustvoll, L.J., 2011. Survey of microscopic anthropogenic particles in Skagerrak.
Institute of Marine Research, Flødevigen, Norway. 21 pp.
Oehlmann, J., Schulte-Oehlmann, U.l., Kloas, W. Jagnytsch, O., Lutz, I., Kusk, K.O.,
Wollenberger, L., Santos, E.M., Paull, G.C., Van Look, K.J.W., Tyler, C.R., 2009. A
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment78
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
76
critical analysis of the biological impacts of plasticizers on wildlife. Phil T Roy Soc B
364, 2047-2062.
Ogata, Y., Takada, H., Mizukawa, K., Hirai, H., Iwasa, S., Endo, S., Mato, Y., Saha, M.,
Okuda, K., Nakashima, A., Murakami, M., Zurcher, N., Booyatumanondo, R., Pauzi
Zakaria, M., Quang Dung, L., Gordon, M., Miguez, C., Suzuki, S., Moore, C.,
Karapanagioti, H.K., Weerts, S., McClurg, T., Burresm, E., Smith, W., Van
Velkenburg, M., Selby Lang, J., Lang, R.C., Laursen, D., Danner, B., Stewardson, N.,
Thompson, R.C., 2009. International Pellet Watch: Global monitoring of persistent
organic pollutants (POPs) in coastal waters. 1. Initial phase data on PCBs, DDTs,
and HCHs. Mar Pollut Bull 58, 1437-1446.
OSPAR, 2007. OSPAR Pilot Project 2000-2006 on monitoring marine beach litter. Final
report. OSPAR report 306. 74 pp.
OSPAR, 2008. Background document for the EcoQO on plastic particles in stomachs of
seabirds. OSPAR Commission publication number 355/2008. 13 pp.
OSPAR, 2009. Marine litter in the North-East Atlantic Region: Assessment and priorities for
response. London, UK 127 pp.
OSPAR, 2011. Determining GES for MSFD descriptor 10 - marine litter, Report of a workshop
held during the ICG-ML (Texel, NL, 15-16 November) and summary of a
questionnaire (draft), 20 pp.
Pinnegar, J.K, Platts, M., 2011. DAPSTOM - An integrated database and portal for fish
stomach records. Version 3.6 Phase 3 - Final Report – 1st July 2011.
Proskurowski, G., Lavender Law, K.L., Moret-Ferguson, S., Reddy, C.M., 2010. The impact of
wind stress on the concentration of plastic debris in the open ocean. Second
International Research Workshop on Microplastic Debris, Center for Urban Waters,
Tacoma, Washington, USA. Nov 5-6, 2010.
Ramirez-Llodra, E., Tyler, P.A., Baker, M.C., Bergstad, O.A., Clark, M.R., Escobar, E., Levin,
L.A., Menot, L., Rowden, A.A., Smith, C.R., Van Dover, C.L., 2011. Man and the last
great wilderness: Human impact on the deep sea. PLoS ONE 6, e22588.
Reuters press release Feb 2011 http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/02/21/idUS125648+21-
Feb-2011+BW20110221 (accessed 9 Aug 2011).
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 79
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 77
Rios, L.M., Moore, C., Jones, P.R., 2007. Persistent organic pollutants carried by synthetic
polymers in the ocean environment. Mar Pollut Bull 54, 1230-1237.
Ritch, E., Brennan, C., MacLeod, C., 2009. Plastic bag politics: modifying consumer
behaviour for sustainable development. Internat J Consum Stud 33, 168-174.
Robards, M.D., Piatt, J.F., Wohl, K.D., 1995. Increasing frequency of plastic particles ingested
by seabirds in the subarctic North Pacific. Mar Pollut Bull 30, 151-157.
Ryan, P.G., Jackson, S., 1987. The lifespan of ingested plastic particles in seabirds and their
effect on digestive efficiency. Mar Pollut Bull 18, 217-219.
Ryan, P.G., 1988. Effects of ingested plastic on seabird feeding: evidence from chickens. Mar
Pollut Bull 19, 125-128.
Ryan, P.G., Connell, A.D., Gardener, B.D., 1988. Plastic ingestion and PCBs in seabirds: Is
there a relationship? Mar Pollut Bull 19, 174-176.
Ryan, P.G., Moore, C.J., Van Franeker, J.A., Moloney, C.L., 2009. Monitoring the abundance
of plastic debris in the marine environment. Philos T Roy Soc B 364, 1999-2012.
Saido, K., Itagaki, T., Sato, H., Kodera, Y., Abe, O., Ogawa, N., Chung, S., Miyashita, K.,
2009. New contamination derived from marine debris plastics. Paper at 238th
American Chemical Society National Meeting, 22-26 August 2009, Washington DC.
Sajiki J., Yonekubo, J., 2003. Leaching of bisphenol A (BPA) to seawater from polycarbonate
plastic and its degradation by reactive oxygen species. Chemosphere 51, 55-62.
Schlummer, M., Brandl, F., Mäurer, A., 2005. Analysis of flame retardant additives in polymer
fractions of waste of electric and electronic equipment (WEEE) by means of HPLC–
UV/MS and GPC–HPLV–UV. J Chromatogr A 1064, 39-51.
Shah, A.A., Hasan, F., Hameed, A., Ahmed, S., 2008. Biological degradation of plastics: A
comprehensive review. Biotechnol Adv 26, 246-265.
Shaw, D.G., Day, R.H., 1994. Colour- and form-dependent loss of plastic micro-debris from
the North Pacific Ocean. Mar Pollut Bull 28, 39-43.
Sivan, A., 2011. New perspectives in plastic biodegradation. Curr Opin Biotechnol 22, 422-
426.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment80
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
78
Spear, L.B., Ainley, D.G., Ribic, C.A., 1995. Incidence of plastic in seabirds from the tropical
Pacific, 1984–91: Relation with distribution of species, sex, age, season, year and
body weight. Mar Environ Res 40, 123-146.
Steegemans, P., 2008. Projectplan integrale aanpak zwerfafval binnen het beheersgebied
van Waterschap Roer en Overmaas. Waterschap Roer en Overmaas, Sittard. 14 pp.
Tabet, L., Bussy, C., Setyan, A., Simon-Deckers, A., Rossi, M.J., Boczkowski, J., Lanone, S.
2011. Coating carbon nanotubes with a polystyrene based polymer protects against
pulmonary toxicity. Particle Fibre Toxicol 8, 3, 13 pp.
Takada, H., 2006. Call for pellets! International Pellet Watch Global Monitoring of POPs using
beached plastic resin pellets. Mar Pollut Bull 52, 1547-1548.
Talsness, C.E., Andrade, A.J.M., Kuriyama, S.N., Taylor, J.A., Vom Saal, F.S., 2009.
Components of plastic: experimental studies in animals and relevance for human
health. Philos T Roy Soc B 364, 2079-2096.
Tanabe, S., Watanabe, M., Minh, T.B., Kunisue, T., Nakanishi, S., Tanaka, H., 2004. PCDDs,
PCDFs, and coplanar PCBs in albatross from the North Pacific and Southern
Oceans: Levels, patterns, and toxicological implications. Environ Sci Technol 38,
403-413.
Tang, L., Eaton, J.W., 1999. Review Article. Natural responses to unnatural materials: A
molecular mechanism for foreign body reactions. Mol Med 5, 351-358.
Teuten, E.L., Rowland, S.J., Galloway, T.S., Thompson, R.C., 2007. Potential for plastics to
transport hydrophobic contaminants. Environ Sci Technol 41, 7759-7764.
Teuten, E.L., Saquing, J.M., Knappe, D.R.U., Barlaz, M.A., Jonsson, S., Björn, A., Rowland,
S.J., Thompson, R.C., Galloway, T.S., Yamashita, R., Ochi, D., Watanuki, Y., Moore,
C., Viet, P.H., Tana, T.S., Prudente, M., Boonyatumanond, R., Zakaria, M.P.,
Akkhavong, K., Ogata, Y., Hirai, H., Iwasa, S., Mizukawa, K., Hagino, Y., Imamura,
A., Saha, M., Takada, H., 2009. Transport and release of chemicals from plastics to
the environment and to wildlife. Philos T Roy Soc B 364, 2027-2045.
Thain, J.E., Vethaak, D.A., Hylland, K., 2008. Contaminants in marine ecosystems:
developing an integrated indicator framework using biological effects techniques. J
Mar Sci 65, 1508-1514.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 81
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 79
Thompson, R.C., Olsen, Y., Mitchell, R.P., Davis, A., Rowland, S.J., John, A.W.G.,
McGonigle, D., Russell, A.E., 2004. Lost at sea: Where is all the plastic? Science
304, 838-838.
Thompson, R.C., Moore, C.J., Vom Saal, F.S., Swan, S.H., 2009. Plastics, the environment
and human health: current consensus and future trends. Philos T Roy Soc B 364,
2153-2166.
Thompson, R.C., La Belle, B.E., Bouwman, H., Neretin, L., 2011. Marine debris: Defining a
global environmental challenge. UNEP Science and Technical Advisory Panel
(STAP). Advisory Document. 28 pp.
Tuomainen, A., Stark, H., Seuri, M., Hirvonen, M-R., Linnainmaa, M., Sieppi, A., Tukiainen,
H., 2006. Experimental PVC material challenge in subjects with occupational PVC
exposure. Environ Health Perspect 114, 409-1413.
UNEP, 2005. Marine litter: an analytical overview. United Nations Environment Programme,
Nairobi, Kenya. 58 pp.
UNEP, 2009. Marine Litter: A Global Challenge. United Nations Environment Programme,
Nairobi, Kenya. 232 pp.
UNEP Year Book 2011: Emerging issues in our global environment. 2011. UNEP Division of
Early Warning and Assessment, United Nations Environmental Programme, Nairobi,
Kenya. 92 pp.
Van Franeker, J.A., Blaize, C., Danielsen, J., Fairclough, K., Gollan, J., Guse, N., Hansen P-
L., Heubeck, M., Jensen, J-K., Le Guillou, G., 2011. Monitoring plastic ingestion by
the northern fulmar Fulmarus glacialis in the North Sea. Environ Pollut 159, 2609-
2015.
Van Kessel, T., Winterwerp, H., Van Prooijen, B., Van Ledden, M., Borst, W., 2011. Modelling
the seasonal dynamics of SPM with a simple algorithm for the buffering of fines in a
sandy seabed. Contin Shelf Res 31, S124-S134.
Van Paassen, J., 2010. Plastic afval in rivieren - Onderzoek naar hoeveelheid en
samenstelling. Student BSc research paper. Utrecht University, the Netherlands. 32
pp.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment82
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
80
Van Weenen, H., Haffmans, S., 2011. Verkennende studie “Plasticverontreiniging van de
Oceanen”. 51 pp.
Vom Saal, F.S., Hughes, C., 2005. An extensive new literature concerning low dose effects of
bisphenol A shows the need for a new risk assessment. Environ Health Perspect
113, 926-933.
Walczyk, D., Baldelli Bombelli, F., Monopoli, M.P., Lynch, I., Dawson, K.A., 2010. What the
cell ‘sees’ in bionanoscience. J Am Chem Soc 132, 5761-5768.
Ward, J., Shumway, S., 2004. Separating the grain from the chaff: Particle selection in
suspension- and deposit-feeding bivalves. J Exp Mar Biol Ecol 300, 83-130.
Ward, J.E., Kach, D.J., 2009. Marine aggregates facilitate ingestion of nanoparticles by
suspension-feeding bivalves. Mar Environ Res 68, 137-142.
Wesselinova, D., 2011. Current major cancer targets for nanoparticle systems. Curr Cancer
Drug Targets 11, 164-83.
Wick, P., Malek, A., Manser, P., Meili, D., Maeder-Althaus, X., Diener, L., Diener, P-A., Zisch,
A., Krug, H.F., Von Mandach, U., 2010. Barrier capacity of human placenta for nano-
sized materials. Environ Health Perspect 118, 432-436.
Wurl, O., Obbard, J.P., 2004. A review of pollutants in the sea-surface microlayer (SML): a
unique habitat for marine organisms. Mar Pollut Bull 48, 1016-1030.
Yamashita, R., Tanimura, A., 2007. Floating plastic in the Kuroshio Current area, western
North Pacific Ocean. Mar Pollut Bull 54, 485-488.
Yang, C.A., Yaniger, S.I., Craig Jordan, V., Klein, D.J., Bittner, G.D., 2011. Most plastic
products release estrogenic chemicals: a potential health problem that can be solved.
Environ Health Perspect 119, 989-996.
Ye, S., Andrady, A.L., 1991. Fouling of floating plastic debris under Biscayne Bay exposure
conditions. Mar Pollut Bull 22, 608-613.
Zarfl, C., Matthies, M., 2010. Are marine plastic particles transport vectors for organic
pollutants to the Arctic? Mar Pollut Bull 60, 1810-1814.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 83
1203772-000-ZKS-0002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 81
Zitko, V., Hanlon, M., 1991. Another source of pollution by plastics: skin cleaners with plastic
scrubbers. Mar Pollut Bull 22, 41-42.
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment84
A Abbreviations used in this report
ABS Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene
AS-MADE Assessment of Marine Debris on the Belgian Continental Shelf
BCS Belgian Continental Shelf
CPR Continuous plankton recorder
DCS Dutch Continental Shelf
EcoQO Ecological quality indicator (OSPAR programme)
ENP Engineered nanoparticle
FAO United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization
FTIR Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy
GES Good Environmental Status
HIPS High impact polystyrene
ICES International Council for the Exploration of the Sea
IMO International Maritime Organization
INTERREG INTERREG Community Initiative (programme to stimulate interregional cooperation in EU)
IVM-VU Institute for Environmental Studies, VU University Amsterdam
JRC European Commission Joint Research Centre
KIMO Local Authorities International Environmental Organisation
L Litre
mm Millimetre (10-3 m)
MSFD Marine Strategy Framework Directive
TSG Technical Subgroup (on Marine Litter for the MSFD)
NGO Non-governmental organisation
nm Nanometre (10-9 m)
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
OSPAR Oslo and Paris Conventions for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North-East Atlantic
PA Polyamides (nylons)
PC Polycarbonate
PC/ABS Polycarbonate/Acrylonitrile butadiene styrene
PCP Personal care product (cosmetics)
PE Polyethylene
PES Polyester
PET Polyethylene terephthalate
POP Persistent Organic Pollutant
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 85
PP Polypropylene
PS Polystyrene
PU Polyurethanes
PVC Polyvinyl chloride
PVDC Polyvinylidene chloride (Saran)
QA/QC Quality Assurance and Quality Control
REACH Registration, Evaluation, Authorization and Restriction of Chemicals
Directive (EC1907/2006)
SEM Scanning electron microscopy
STP Sewage treatment plant
UK NERC United Kingdom Natural Environment Research Council
µm Micrometer (10-6 m)
UNEP United Nations Environment Programme
WFD Water Framework Directive
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment86
Glob
al c
onve
ntio
ns a
nd a
gree
men
ts
Unite
d Na
tions
Con
vent
ion
on th
e La
w o
f the
Sea
(UNC
LOS)
and
Gen
eral
Ass
embl
y(G
A) R
esol
utio
ns
Sets
out
the
lega
l fra
mew
ork
with
in w
hich
all a
ctiv
ities
in th
e oc
eans
and
sea
s m
ust b
eca
rrie
d ou
t. Th
e G
ener
al A
ssem
bly
carr
ies
out a
nnua
l rev
iew
s of
the
law
of t
he s
ea(R
esol
utio
ns),
base
d on
ann
ual c
ompr
ehen
sive
repo
rts p
repa
red
by th
e Se
cret
ary-
Gen
eral
.
http
://w
ww
.un.
org/
Dept
s/lo
s/in
dex.
htm
Glo
bal P
rogr
amm
e of
Act
ion
for t
he P
rote
ctio
n of
the
Mar
ine
Envi
ronm
ent f
rom
Land
-bas
ed A
ctiv
ities
(UNE
P G
PA)
An
inte
rgov
ernm
enta
l pro
gram
me
whi
ch a
ddre
sses
the
inte
r-lin
kage
s be
twee
n fr
eshw
ater
and
the
coas
tal e
nviro
nmen
t.ht
tp://
ww
w.g
pa.u
nep.
org/
Inte
rnat
iona
l Con
vent
ion
for t
he P
reve
ntio
n of
Pol
lutio
n fr
om S
hips
(M
ARP
OL
73/7
8) a
nd
Ann
ex V
Prev
entio
n of
mar
ine
litter
pol
lutio
n un
der I
MO
(Int
erna
tiona
l Mar
itime
Org
aniz
atio
n) c
onve
ntio
ns.
http
://w
ww
.imo.
org/
Lond
on C
onve
ntio
n 19
72, C
onve
ntio
n on
the
Prev
entio
n of
Mar
itime
Pollu
tion
byDu
mpi
ng o
f Was
tes
and
Oth
er M
atte
r and
199
6 Pr
otoc
ol T
here
toPr
even
tion
of m
arin
e po
llutio
n by
dum
ping
of w
aste
s an
d ot
her m
atte
r.ht
tp://
ww
w.im
o.or
g/ho
me.
asp?
topi
c_id
=148
8
Base
l Con
vent
ion
on th
e Co
ntro
l of T
rans
boun
dary
Mov
emen
ts o
f Haz
ardo
us W
aste
san
d th
eir D
ispo
sal
The
Conv
entio
n ha
s 17
5 Pa
rties
and
aim
s to
pro
tect
hum
an h
ealth
and
the
envi
ronm
ent a
gain
st th
e ad
vers
e ef
fect
s re
sultin
g fr
om th
e ge
nera
tion,
man
agem
ent,
trans
boun
dary
mov
emen
ts a
nd
disp
osal
of h
azar
dous
and
oth
er w
aste
sht
tp://
ww
w.b
asel
.int/
Age
nda
21 a
nd th
e Jo
hann
esbu
rg P
lan
of Im
plem
enta
tion
Age
nda
21 is
a p
rogr
amm
e ra
n by
the
Unite
d Na
tions
(UN
) rel
ated
to s
usta
inab
le d
evel
opm
ent.
http
://w
ww
.un.
org/
esa/
sust
dev/
Conv
entio
n on
Bio
logi
cal D
iver
sity
, with
the
Jaka
rta M
anda
teM
inis
teria
l Sta
tem
ent o
n th
e Im
plem
enta
tion
of th
e Co
nven
tion
on B
iolo
gica
l Div
ersi
tyht
tp://
ww
w.o
cean
law
.net
/text
s/ja
karta
.htm
FAO
Cod
e of
Con
duct
for R
espo
nsib
le F
ishe
ries
App
ropr
iate
mea
sure
s sh
ould
be
take
n to
min
imiz
e w
aste
, cle
an u
p di
scar
ds, e
tc.
http
://w
ww
.fao.
org/
docr
ep/0
05/v
9878
e/v9
878e
00.h
tm
Conv
entio
n on
Bio
logi
cal D
iver
sity
, with
the
Jaka
rta M
anda
teTh
e co
nser
vatio
n of
bio
logi
cal d
iver
sity
, the
sus
tain
able
use
of i
ts c
ompo
nent
s, a
nd th
e fa
ir an
d eq
uita
ble
shar
ing
of b
enef
its a
risin
g fr
om th
e us
e of
gen
etic
res
ourc
es.
http
://w
ww
.cbd
.int/h
isto
ry/
Conv
entio
n on
Mig
rato
ry s
peci
es, w
ith th
e ag
reem
ent o
n th
e co
nser
vatio
n of
alb
atro
sses
an
d pe
trels
The
parti
es s
hall t
ake
appr
opria
te m
easu
res
to m
inim
ize
the
disc
harg
e fr
om la
nd-b
ased
sou
rces
an
d ve
ssel
s, o
f pol
luta
nts,
whi
ch m
ay h
ave
an a
dver
se e
ffec
t on
alba
tross
es a
nd p
etre
ls e
ither
on
land
or a
t sea
.ht
tp://
ww
w.c
ms.
int/s
peci
es/a
cap/
acap
_bkr
d.ht
m
Oth
er g
loba
l act
ors
and
initi
ativ
es
Inte
rgov
ernm
enta
l Oce
anic
Com
mis
sion
of U
NESC
OTh
e IO
C a
ssis
ts g
over
nmen
ts in
sha
ring
thei
r ind
ivid
ual a
nd c
olle
ctiv
e oc
ean
prob
lem
s. In
the
1970
s an
d 19
80s
they
wer
e ve
ry a
ctiv
e on
was
te, b
ut c
urre
ntly
hav
e no
pro
gram
s ru
nnin
g.
http
://io
c-un
esco
.org
/
Join
t Gro
up o
f Exp
erts
on
the
Scie
ntifi
c A
spec
ts o
f Mar
ine
Envi
ronm
enta
l Pro
tect
ion
(GES
AM
P)G
ESA
MP
is a
n ad
viso
ry b
ody,
est
ablis
hed
in 1
969,
that
adv
ises
the
Unite
d Na
tions
(UN)
sys
tem
on
the
scie
ntifi
c as
pect
s of
mar
ine
envi
ronm
enta
l pro
tect
ion.
http
://ge
sam
p.ne
t/pag
e.ph
p?pa
ge=1
Inte
rnat
iona
l Cor
al R
eef I
nitia
tive
Envi
ronm
enta
l par
tner
ship
that
brin
gs s
take
hold
ers
toge
ther
with
the
obje
ctiv
e of
sus
tain
able
use
and
cons
erva
tion
of c
oral
reef
s fo
r fut
ure
gene
ratio
ns.
http
://w
ww
.icrif
orum
.org
/
Seas
at R
isk
(um
brel
la o
rgan
izat
ion
for e
nviro
nmen
tal N
GO
s at
Sea
)Th
e Eu
rope
an a
ssoc
iatio
n of
non
-gov
ernm
enta
l env
ironm
enta
l org
anis
atio
ns w
orkin
g to
pro
tect
an
d re
stor
e to
hea
lth th
e m
arin
e en
viro
nmen
t of t
he E
urop
ean
seas
and
the
wid
er N
orth
Eas
t A
tlant
ic.
http
://w
ww
.sea
s-at
-ris
k.or
g/
Glob
al n
etw
orks
of i
nter
natio
nal c
ivil
soci
ety
orga
niza
tions
Inte
rnat
iona
l Coa
stal
Cle
anup
(ICC
)IC
C is
the
larg
est c
oast
al c
lean
up c
ampa
ign.
Eac
h ye
ar to
ns o
f tra
sh is
cle
ared
from
coa
stlin
es,
river
s an
d la
kes
wor
ldw
ide
and
ever
ythi
ng is
rep
orte
d.ht
tp://
ww
w.o
cean
cons
erva
ncy.
org/
site
/Pag
eSer
ver?
page
nam
e=pr
ess_
icc
Clea
n Up
the
Wor
ld
Clea
n Up
the
Wor
ld is
a c
omm
unity
bas
ed e
nviro
nmen
tal p
rogr
am th
at in
spire
s an
d
empo
wer
s in
divi
dual
s an
d co
mm
unitie
s to
cle
an u
p, fi
x up
and
con
serv
e th
eir
envi
ronm
ent.
http
://w
ww
.cle
anup
thew
orld
.org
/en/
Crui
se L
iner
s In
tern
atio
nal A
ssoc
iatio
n (C
LIA
)A
dopt
ed m
anda
tory
env
ironm
enta
l sta
ndar
ds f
or c
ruis
e sh
ips
in 2
001.
http
://w
ww
2.cr
uisi
ng.o
rg/in
dust
ry/te
ch-in
tro.c
fm
Proj
ect A
WA
RE fo
unda
tion
Inte
rnat
iona
l Cle
anup
Day
eve
nts
invo
lve
thou
sand
s of
div
e vo
lunt
eers
rem
ovin
g tra
sh fr
om m
ore
than
900
glo
bal d
ive
loca
tions
in 1
00 c
ount
ries
and
terr
itorie
s. P
roje
ct A
WA
RE c
oord
inat
es th
e
unde
rwat
er p
ortio
n of
Inte
rnat
iona
l Cle
anup
Day
in c
oope
ratio
n w
ith th
e O
cean
Con
serv
ancy
.
http
://w
ww
.pro
ject
awar
e.or
g/
Glob
al in
itiat
ives
from
Med
ia/J
ourn
alis
ts
Plas
tic O
cean
sA
team
of t
he w
orld
’s to
p sc
ient
ists
and
lead
ing
film
mak
ers
prod
uce
a po
wer
ful,
high
-end
docu
men
tary
in h
igh
defin
ition
on p
last
ics
in o
cean
s.w
ww
.pla
stic
ocea
ns.n
et
Regi
onal
legi
slat
ion,
act
ors,
act
iviti
es a
nd in
itiat
ives
on
mar
ine
litte
r
Nort
h-Ea
st A
tlant
ic (O
SPA
R):
OSP
AR
con
vent
ion
EcoQ
O o
n pl
astic
s in
sto
mac
h co
nten
t of N
orth
ern
Fulm
ars
(don
e by
IMA
RES)
.ht
tp://
ww
w.o
spar
.org
/EU
legi
slat
ion
The
EU D
irect
ive
on th
e la
ndfil
l of w
aste
(Dire
ctiv
e199
9/31
/EC)
.ht
tp://
eur-
lex.
euro
pa.e
u/Le
xUriS
erv/
LexU
riSer
v.do
?uri=
CELE
X:31
999L
0031
:EN:
NOT
The
EU D
irect
ive
on p
ort r
ecep
tion
faci
lities
for
shi
p-ge
nera
ted
was
te a
nd c
argo
resi
dues
(Dire
ctiv
e 20
00/ 5
9/EC
, Dec
embe
r 200
2).
http
://eu
r-le
x.eu
ropa
.eu/
LexU
riSer
v/Le
xUriS
erv.
do?u
ri=CE
LEX:
3200
0L00
59:E
N:HT
ML
The
EU D
irect
ive
on p
acka
ging
and
pac
kagi
ng w
aste
(Dire
ctiv
e 20
04/1
2/EC
).ht
tp://
euro
pa.e
u/le
gisl
atio
n_su
mm
arie
s/en
viro
nmen
t/was
te_m
anag
emen
t/l21
207_
en.h
tmTh
e EU
Mar
ine
Stra
tegy
Fra
mew
ork
Dire
ctiv
e (2
008/
56/E
C).
http
://eu
r-le
x.eu
ropa
.eu/
LexU
riSer
v/Le
xUriS
erv.
do?u
ri=O
J:L:
2008
:164
:001
9:00
40:E
N:PD
FTh
e EU
Wat
er F
ram
ewor
k Di
rect
ive
(200
0/60
/EC)
.ht
tp://
ec.e
urop
a.eu
/env
ironm
ent/w
ater
/wat
er-f
ram
ewor
k/in
dex_
en.h
tml
EU F
ishe
ries
Polic
y.ht
tp://
ec.e
urop
a.eu
/fish
erie
s/in
dex_
en.h
tmEU
Was
te D
irect
ive.
http
://ec
.eur
opa.
eu/e
nviro
nmen
t/was
te/le
gisl
atio
n/a.
htm
Bath
ing
Wat
er D
irect
ive
1976
.ht
tp://
ec.e
urop
a.eu
/env
ironm
ent/w
ater
/wat
er-b
athi
ng/in
dex_
en.h
tml
REA
Ch D
irect
ive
(Reg
istra
tion,
Eva
luat
ion,
Aut
horiz
atio
n &
Rest
rictio
n of
Che
mic
als)
EC1
907/
2006
.ht
tp://
ec.e
urop
a.eu
/env
ironm
ent/c
hem
ical
s/re
ach/
reac
h_in
tro.h
tm
Inte
grat
ed M
aritim
e Po
licy.
http
://ec
.eur
opa.
eu/m
aritim
eaff
airs
/sub
page
_en.
htm
l
B
Int
erna
tiona
l leg
isla
tion
and
polic
ies
rele
vant
to m
icro
plas
tics
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 87
Regi
onal
initi
ativ
esUN
EP R
egio
nal S
eas
Prog
ram
UNEP
regi
onal
sea
s pr
ogra
m.
http
://w
ww
.une
p.or
g/re
gion
alse
as/
Coas
twat
ch E
urop
e NG
O; c
ondu
cted
sur
veys
and
bea
ch-c
lean
up
prog
ram
s.ht
tp://
ww
w.c
oast
wat
ch.o
rg/C
oast
wat
ch.o
rg/W
elco
me.
htm
l
MCS
Bea
chw
atch
MCS
Ado
pt-a
-Bea
ch a
nd M
CS B
each
wat
ch a
re c
oast
al e
nviro
nmen
tal in
itiativ
es o
rgan
ised
by
the
Mar
ine
Cons
erva
tion
Soci
ety
(MCS
), in
volv
ing
loca
l indi
vidu
als,
gro
ups
and
com
mun
ities
in c
arin
g
for t
heir
coas
tal e
nviro
nmen
t.
ww
w.m
scuk
.org
Euro
pean
initi
ativ
es f
rom
Med
ia/J
ourn
alis
ts
BBC
Rebe
cca
Hosk
ing
and
Tim
Gre
en "H
awai
i - M
essa
ge in
the
Wav
es" i
s a
film
from
the
BBC
Nat
ural
Hist
ory
Unit
look
ing
at s
ome
of th
e en
viro
nmen
tal c
halle
nges
fac
ing
the
peop
le a
nd w
ildlif
e of
the
Haw
aiia
n Is
land
s.
ww
w.m
essa
gein
thew
aves
.com
Nort
h Se
a:
KIM
O In
tern
atio
nal
Inte
rnat
iona
l ass
ocia
tion
of L
ocal
Aut
horit
ies,
whi
ch w
as f
ound
ed in
Esb
jerg
, Den
mar
k, in
Aug
ust
1990
to w
ork
tow
ards
cle
anin
g up
pol
lutio
n in
the
North
Sea
. ht
tp://
ww
w.k
imoi
nter
natio
nal.o
rg/H
ome.
aspx
Save
the
North
Sea
pro
ject
To re
duce
mar
ine
litter
in th
e No
rth S
ea R
egio
n by
influ
enci
ng a
ttitu
des
and
beha
viou
r of t
he ta
rget
se
ctor
s th
at a
re a
mon
g th
e ke
y so
urce
s of
mar
ine
litter
. The
se a
re th
e oi
l, fis
hing
and
shi
ppin
g in
dust
ries
and
recr
eatio
nal s
ecto
r. ht
tp://
ww
w.s
avet
heno
rthse
a.co
m/s
a/no
de.a
sp?n
ode=
1368
Fish
ing
for l
itter
The
initia
tive
not o
nly
invo
lves
the
dire
ct re
mov
al o
f litt
er f
rom
the
sea,
but
als
o ra
ises
aw
aren
ess
of th
e si
gnifi
canc
e of
the
prob
lem
am
ongs
t eac
h co
mm
unity
. Thi
s pi
onee
ring
proj
ect h
as e
xpan
ded
from
an
orig
inal
pilo
t sch
eme
in th
e Ne
ther
land
s to
now
be
a hi
ghly
rec
ogni
sabl
e in
itiativ
e in
the
Unite
d Ki
ngdo
m a
nd b
eyon
d.
http
://w
ww
.kim
oint
erna
tiona
l.org
/Fis
hing
forL
itter
.asp
x
Gre
en P
ort C
ruis
e No
rth S
eaHe
ld in
ass
ocia
tion
with
Cru
ise
Gat
eway
, an
EU In
terr
eg IV
B No
rth S
ea R
egio
n pr
ojec
t tha
t has
be
en s
et u
p to
con
side
r way
s of
enc
oura
ging
and
pro
mot
ing
Sust
aina
ble
Crui
se a
ctiv
ities
in th
e No
rth S
ea R
egio
n (N
SR).
http
://w
ww
.nor
thse
areg
ion.
eu/iv
b/us
er-e
vent
s/&t
id=6
6
Blue
Fla
gBl
ue F
lag
is a
n in
tern
atio
nal c
ampa
ign
that
was
sta
rted
to p
rote
ct th
e m
arin
e en
viro
nmen
t in
harb
ours
and
on
beac
hes.
It ta
kes
plac
e in
Den
mar
k, N
orw
ay, S
wed
en a
nd th
e UK
.ht
tp://
ww
w.b
luef
lag.
org/
Natio
nal l
egis
latio
n on
litte
r in
the
Neth
erla
nds
Wet
voo
rkom
ing
vero
ntre
inig
ing
door
sch
epen
Impl
emen
tatio
n M
ARP
OL.
http
://w
ette
n.ov
erhe
id.n
l/BW
BR00
0364
2/ge
ldig
heid
sdat
um_1
0-08
-201
1
Wat
erw
etIm
plem
enta
tion
Lond
on C
onve
ntio
n.ht
tp://
ww
w.h
elpd
eskw
ater
.nl/o
nder
wer
pen/
wet
gevi
ng-b
elei
d/w
ater
wet
Cons
umer
and
priv
ate
initi
ativ
es in
the
Neth
erla
nds
Duik
de
Noor
dzee
Sch
oon
Initia
tive
of G
et W
et M
aritie
m a
nd d
e V
eren
igin
g Ku
st e
n Ze
e, w
here
ann
ually
exp
erie
nced
div
ers
free
cra
bs, l
obst
ers
and
fish
from
net
s an
d lin
es o
n w
reck
s.w
ww
.dui
kden
oord
zees
choo
n.nl
Plas
tic W
hale
Build
ing
a bo
at m
ade
out o
f pla
stic
dbr
is th
at w
ill sa
il acc
ross
the
Neth
erla
nds
and
to fi
nd s
olut
ions
fo
r the
Pla
stic
Sou
p.w
ww
.pla
stic
wha
le.o
rg
Tass
enBo
lA
cont
aine
r for
pla
stic
bag
s in
eve
ry s
uper
mar
ket.
Toge
ther
with
Stic
htin
g G
reen
wis
h an
d th
e de
sign
age
ncy
IDEA
L &
CO.
ww
w.ta
ssen
bol.n
l
Dutc
h in
itiat
ives
from
Med
ia/J
ourn
alis
ts
Plas
tic S
oep
Jess
e G
oose
ns h
as w
ritte
n th
e bo
ok 'P
last
ic S
oep'
whi
ch p
ut th
e pl
astic
pol
lutio
n on
our
oce
ans,
th
e en
viro
nmen
t and
our
hea
lth in
the
Neth
erla
nds
on th
e m
ap.
ww
w.p
last
icso
ep.n
l, w
ww
.jess
egoo
ssen
s.nl
ACT
You
ng D
utch
sci
entis
ts lo
ok fo
r sol
utio
ns to
impo
rtant
glo
bal is
sues
, and
mak
e th
ese
prac
tical
ly
avai
labl
e. T
he p
last
ic s
oup
is th
e fir
st p
robl
em th
ey're
adr
essi
ng.
http
://ac
tglo
bal.n
l/act
-por
tal/p
last
ic-s
oup
VPR
O -
The
Beag
leIn
the
VPR
O-p
rogr
am 'B
eagl
e: in
het
kie
lzog
van
Dar
win
' the
pla
stic
sou
p pr
oble
m is
dem
onst
rate
d
and
awar
ess
for t
he is
sue
is r
aise
d.ht
tp://
beag
le.v
pro.
nl/
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment88
Regi
onal
initi
ativ
esUN
EP R
egio
nal S
eas
Prog
ram
UNEP
regi
onal
sea
s pr
ogra
m.
http
://w
ww
.une
p.or
g/re
gion
alse
as/
Coas
twat
ch E
urop
e NG
O; c
ondu
cted
sur
veys
and
bea
ch-c
lean
up
prog
ram
s.ht
tp://
ww
w.c
oast
wat
ch.o
rg/C
oast
wat
ch.o
rg/W
elco
me.
htm
l
MCS
Bea
chw
atch
MCS
Ado
pt-a
-Bea
ch a
nd M
CS B
each
wat
ch a
re c
oast
al e
nviro
nmen
tal in
itiativ
es o
rgan
ised
by
the
Mar
ine
Cons
erva
tion
Soci
ety
(MCS
), in
volv
ing
loca
l indi
vidu
als,
gro
ups
and
com
mun
ities
in c
arin
g
for t
heir
coas
tal e
nviro
nmen
t.
ww
w.m
scuk
.org
Euro
pean
initi
ativ
es f
rom
Med
ia/J
ourn
alis
ts
BBC
Rebe
cca
Hosk
ing
and
Tim
Gre
en "H
awai
i - M
essa
ge in
the
Wav
es" i
s a
film
from
the
BBC
Nat
ural
Hist
ory
Unit
look
ing
at s
ome
of th
e en
viro
nmen
tal c
halle
nges
fac
ing
the
peop
le a
nd w
ildlif
e of
the
Haw
aiia
n Is
land
s.
ww
w.m
essa
gein
thew
aves
.com
Nort
h Se
a:
KIM
O In
tern
atio
nal
Inte
rnat
iona
l ass
ocia
tion
of L
ocal
Aut
horit
ies,
whi
ch w
as f
ound
ed in
Esb
jerg
, Den
mar
k, in
Aug
ust
1990
to w
ork
tow
ards
cle
anin
g up
pol
lutio
n in
the
North
Sea
. ht
tp://
ww
w.k
imoi
nter
natio
nal.o
rg/H
ome.
aspx
Save
the
North
Sea
pro
ject
To re
duce
mar
ine
litter
in th
e No
rth S
ea R
egio
n by
influ
enci
ng a
ttitu
des
and
beha
viou
r of t
he ta
rget
se
ctor
s th
at a
re a
mon
g th
e ke
y so
urce
s of
mar
ine
litter
. The
se a
re th
e oi
l, fis
hing
and
shi
ppin
g in
dust
ries
and
recr
eatio
nal s
ecto
r. ht
tp://
ww
w.s
avet
heno
rthse
a.co
m/s
a/no
de.a
sp?n
ode=
1368
Fish
ing
for l
itter
The
initia
tive
not o
nly
invo
lves
the
dire
ct re
mov
al o
f litt
er f
rom
the
sea,
but
als
o ra
ises
aw
aren
ess
of th
e si
gnifi
canc
e of
the
prob
lem
am
ongs
t eac
h co
mm
unity
. Thi
s pi
onee
ring
proj
ect h
as e
xpan
ded
from
an
orig
inal
pilo
t sch
eme
in th
e Ne
ther
land
s to
now
be
a hi
ghly
rec
ogni
sabl
e in
itiativ
e in
the
Unite
d Ki
ngdo
m a
nd b
eyon
d.
http
://w
ww
.kim
oint
erna
tiona
l.org
/Fis
hing
forL
itter
.asp
x
Gre
en P
ort C
ruis
e No
rth S
eaHe
ld in
ass
ocia
tion
with
Cru
ise
Gat
eway
, an
EU In
terr
eg IV
B No
rth S
ea R
egio
n pr
ojec
t tha
t has
be
en s
et u
p to
con
side
r way
s of
enc
oura
ging
and
pro
mot
ing
Sust
aina
ble
Crui
se a
ctiv
ities
in th
e No
rth S
ea R
egio
n (N
SR).
http
://w
ww
.nor
thse
areg
ion.
eu/iv
b/us
er-e
vent
s/&t
id=6
6
Blue
Fla
gBl
ue F
lag
is a
n in
tern
atio
nal c
ampa
ign
that
was
sta
rted
to p
rote
ct th
e m
arin
e en
viro
nmen
t in
harb
ours
and
on
beac
hes.
It ta
kes
plac
e in
Den
mar
k, N
orw
ay, S
wed
en a
nd th
e UK
.ht
tp://
ww
w.b
luef
lag.
org/
Natio
nal l
egis
latio
n on
litte
r in
the
Neth
erla
nds
Wet
voo
rkom
ing
vero
ntre
inig
ing
door
sch
epen
Impl
emen
tatio
n M
ARP
OL.
http
://w
ette
n.ov
erhe
id.n
l/BW
BR00
0364
2/ge
ldig
heid
sdat
um_1
0-08
-201
1
Wat
erw
etIm
plem
enta
tion
Lond
on C
onve
ntio
n.ht
tp://
ww
w.h
elpd
eskw
ater
.nl/o
nder
wer
pen/
wet
gevi
ng-b
elei
d/w
ater
wet
Cons
umer
and
priv
ate
initi
ativ
es in
the
Neth
erla
nds
Duik
de
Noor
dzee
Sch
oon
Initia
tive
of G
et W
et M
aritie
m a
nd d
e V
eren
igin
g Ku
st e
n Ze
e, w
here
ann
ually
exp
erie
nced
div
ers
free
cra
bs, l
obst
ers
and
fish
from
net
s an
d lin
es o
n w
reck
s.w
ww
.dui
kden
oord
zees
choo
n.nl
Plas
tic W
hale
Build
ing
a bo
at m
ade
out o
f pla
stic
dbr
is th
at w
ill sa
il acc
ross
the
Neth
erla
nds
and
to fi
nd s
olut
ions
fo
r the
Pla
stic
Sou
p.w
ww
.pla
stic
wha
le.o
rg
Tass
enBo
lA
cont
aine
r for
pla
stic
bag
s in
eve
ry s
uper
mar
ket.
Toge
ther
with
Stic
htin
g G
reen
wis
h an
d th
e de
sign
age
ncy
IDEA
L &
CO.
ww
w.ta
ssen
bol.n
l
Dutc
h in
itiat
ives
from
Med
ia/J
ourn
alis
ts
Plas
tic S
oep
Jess
e G
oose
ns h
as w
ritte
n th
e bo
ok 'P
last
ic S
oep'
whi
ch p
ut th
e pl
astic
pol
lutio
n on
our
oce
ans,
th
e en
viro
nmen
t and
our
hea
lth in
the
Neth
erla
nds
on th
e m
ap.
ww
w.p
last
icso
ep.n
l, w
ww
.jess
egoo
ssen
s.nl
ACT
You
ng D
utch
sci
entis
ts lo
ok fo
r sol
utio
ns to
impo
rtant
glo
bal is
sues
, and
mak
e th
ese
prac
tical
ly
avai
labl
e. T
he p
last
ic s
oup
is th
e fir
st p
robl
em th
ey're
adr
essi
ng.
http
://ac
tglo
bal.n
l/act
-por
tal/p
last
ic-s
oup
VPR
O -
The
Beag
leIn
the
VPR
O-p
rogr
am 'B
eagl
e: in
het
kie
lzog
van
Dar
win
' the
pla
stic
sou
p pr
oble
m is
dem
onst
rate
d
and
awar
ess
for t
he is
sue
is r
aise
d.ht
tp://
beag
le.v
pro.
nl/
Oth
er le
gisl
atio
n, a
ctor
s, in
itiat
ives
and
net
wor
ks
On
a gl
obal
sca
le
Plas
tiki
Coul
d a
fully
rec
ycla
ble
perf
orm
ing
vess
el b
e en
gine
ered
alm
ost e
ntire
ly o
ut o
f rec
laim
ed p
last
ic
bottl
es, c
ross
the
Paci
fic w
hils
t dem
onst
ratin
g re
al w
orld
sol
utio
ns?
ww
w.th
epla
stiki
.com
Plas
tic P
ollu
tion
Coal
ition
To c
reat
e a
glob
al c
omm
unity
and
igni
te a
soc
ial m
ovem
ent t
o st
op p
last
ic p
ollu
tion
and
its to
xic
impa
cts
wor
ldw
ide.
ww
w.p
last
icpo
llutio
ncoa
lition
.org
TEDx
Gre
atPa
cific
Gar
bage
Patc
hA
prog
ram
of l
ocal
, sel
f-or
gani
zed
even
ts th
at b
ring
peop
le to
geth
er to
sha
re a
TED
-like
expe
rienc
e.ht
tp://
ww
w.te
dxgr
eatp
acifi
cgar
bage
patc
h.co
m/
On
a re
gion
al s
cale
Med
iterr
anea
n:Ba
rcel
ona
conv
entio
nht
tp://
ww
w.u
nep.
ch/re
gion
alse
as/re
gion
s/m
ed/t_
barc
el.h
tm
IOC
Com
mitt
ee fo
r the
Glo
bal in
vest
igat
ion
of p
ollu
tion
in th
e m
arin
e en
viro
nmen
t (G
IPM
E)ht
tp://
ww
w.u
nep.
ch/re
gion
alse
as/m
ain/
partn
ers/
gipm
e.ht
ml
Helle
nic
Mar
ine
Envi
ronm
ent P
rote
ctio
n A
ssoc
iatio
n (H
ELM
EPA
)NG
O; c
ondu
cted
sur
veys
and
bea
ch-c
lean
up
prog
ram
s.ht
tp://
ww
w.h
elm
epa.
gr/e
n/in
dex.
php
CMC-
Oce
anNG
O; c
ondu
cted
sur
veys
and
bea
ch-c
lean
up
prog
ram
s.ht
tp://
ww
w.c
mc-
ocea
n.or
g/Ba
ltic
HELC
OM
The
Baltic
Stra
tegy
on
Port
Rece
ptio
n Fa
ciliti
es f
or S
hip-
gene
rate
d W
aste
s.ht
tp://
ww
w.h
elco
m.fi
/shi
ppin
g/w
aste
/en_
GB/
was
te/
Keep
the
Baltic
Cle
anNe
twor
k of
env
ironm
ent o
rgan
isat
ions
aro
und
the
Baltic
Sea
aim
ing
at in
crea
sing
co-
oper
atio
n,
givi
ng e
nviro
nmen
tal e
duca
tion
and
co-o
rdin
atin
g jo
int c
ampa
igns
to im
prov
e en
viro
nmen
tal
prot
ectio
n as
rel
ated
to le
isur
e bo
atin
g an
d sp
are
time
at th
e se
asid
e.
http
://w
ww
.kee
pbal
tictid
y.or
g/sa
/nod
e.as
p?no
de=2
269
Wid
er C
arri
bean
:
Carta
gena
con
vent
ion
Man
date
s of
the
ICCL
are
hig
hly
rele
vant
her
e.ht
tp://
ww
w.c
ep.u
nep.
org/
carta
gena
-con
vent
ion
Nort
hwes
t Pac
ific
(NO
WPA
P):
NOW
PAP
prog
ram
Gen
erat
ion
of li
tter w
ill be
redu
ced
at th
e so
urce
and
larg
e sc
ale
clea
n-up
s w
ill be
org
aniz
ed.
http
://w
ww
.now
pap.
org/
data
/IGM
7%20
repo
rt.pd
fSm
all I
slan
ds:
Smal
l Isla
nd d
evel
opin
g st
ates
net
wor
k (S
IDSn
et)
Initia
ted
as a
follo
w u
p to
the
Barb
ados
Pro
gram
me
of A
ctio
n fr
om 1
994.
It w
as r
ecog
nise
d th
at a
ll is
land
s sh
are
com
mon
issu
es a
nd S
IDSn
et w
as in
itiate
d w
ith U
NDP
Sust
aina
ble
Deve
lopm
ent
Netw
orkin
g Pr
ogra
mm
e (S
DNP)
and
the
Allia
nce
of S
mal
l Isla
nd S
tate
s (A
OSI
S). S
IDSn
et p
rovi
des
tool
s fo
r virt
ual d
iscu
ssio
n fo
rum
s ch
at c
onfe
renc
es, f
ocus
ed s
earc
hing
, doc
umen
t sub
mis
sion
an
d st
orag
e, m
ailin
g lis
ts, e
vent
s ca
lend
ar, a
nd lin
ks to
rele
vant
BPo
A w
eb s
ites.
http
://w
ww
.sid
snet
.org
/
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 89
Natio
nal l
egis
latio
n an
d in
itiat
ives
UK:
Envi
ronm
ent A
ctCo
mpe
tent
aut
horit
ies
are
resp
onsi
ble
for k
eepi
ng th
eir l
and
clea
r of l
itter
.ht
tp://
ww
w.le
gisl
atio
n.go
v.uk
/ukp
ga/1
995/
25/c
onte
nts
Mer
chan
t Shi
ppin
g Re
gula
tions
:- P
reve
ntio
n of
Pol
lutio
nPo
llutio
n zo
ne 2
00 n
m o
ff th
e co
ast o
f the
UK.
http
://w
ww
.legi
slat
ion.
gov.
uk/u
kpga
/199
5/21
/con
tent
s
- Por
t Was
te R
ecep
tion
Faci
lities
Requ
ire a
ll por
ts to
pro
vide
rece
ptio
n fa
ciliti
es f
or w
aste
.
- Pre
vent
ion
of P
ollu
tion
by G
arba
gePr
ohib
it sh
ips
and
plat
form
s to
dis
pose
of p
last
ics
anyw
here
in th
e se
a.
Mar
itime
and
coas
tgua
rd a
genc
y (M
CA)
Has
cond
ucte
d a
pilo
t pro
ject
to e
stab
lish
met
hodo
logi
es a
nd g
uide
lines
to id
entif
y m
arin
e litt
er f
rom
ship
ping
.ht
tp://
ww
w.d
ft.go
v.uk
/mca
/
Mar
ine
Cons
erva
tion
Soci
ety
(MCS
)NG
O; t
wo
prog
ram
s: B
each
wat
ch a
nd A
dopt
-a-b
each
.ht
tp://
ww
w.m
csuk
.org
/Lo
cal in
itiativ
es
Cum
bria
Mar
ine
Litte
r Pro
ject
Aim
s to
qua
ntify
the
exte
nt a
nd n
atur
e of
the
mar
ine
litter
pro
blem
on
the
Cum
bria
n Co
ast a
nd fi
nd
solu
tions
to re
duce
it.
http
://lib
rary
.coa
stw
eb.in
fo/3
43/1
/Mic
roso
ft_W
ord_
-_2_
Cum
bria
_Mar
ine_
Litte
r.pdf
Ado
pt-a
-bea
chNa
tiona
l env
ironm
enta
l initia
tive
invo
lvin
g lo
cal c
omm
unitie
s in
car
ing
for t
heir
loca
l coa
stal
en
viro
nmen
t. G
roup
s an
d in
divi
dual
s al
l ove
r the
U.K
. are
giv
en th
e op
portu
nity
to a
dopt
thei
r fa
vour
ite s
tretc
h of
coa
st a
nd ta
ke p
art i
n be
ach
clea
ns a
nd s
urve
ys to
mon
itor c
oast
al p
ollu
tion
http
://w
ww
.egc
p.or
g.uk
/pro
ject
s/ad
opta
beac
h.ph
p
Natio
nal A
quat
ic L
itter
Gro
upA
ims
"To
achi
eve
a qu
antif
iabl
e re
duct
ion
in th
e am
ount
of l
itter
in ri
vers
and
the
sea
arou
nd th
e Un
ited
King
dom
from
dom
estic
and
inte
rnat
iona
l sou
rces
and
enh
ance
loca
l aqu
atic
env
ironm
ents
th
roug
h sy
stem
atic
pro
gram
mes
of w
ork.
"ht
tp://
ww
w.n
alg.
org.
uk/
Forth
Est
uary
For
um C
oast
al L
itter
Cam
paig
nA
ims
to "d
evel
op a
nd im
plem
ent a
com
mun
ity 'h
ands
on'
and
pub
lic a
war
enes
s-ra
isin
g pr
ogra
mm
e
inte
nded
to ta
ckle
and
mon
itor t
he is
sue
of m
arin
e an
d co
asta
l litte
r in
the
Firth
of F
orth
.ht
tp://
ww
w.fo
rthes
tuar
yfor
um.c
o.uk
/
Swed
en:
Envi
ronm
enta
l Cod
eSu
stai
nabl
e de
velo
pmen
t. Up
on e
nter
ing
a Sw
edis
h po
rt, v
esse
ls m
ust d
eliv
er w
aste
to a
rece
ptio
n fa
cility
.ht
tp://
ww
w.s
wed
en.g
ov.s
e/co
nten
t/1/c
6/02
/05/
49/6
736c
f92.
Denm
ark:
Hand
s O
n: F
ishi
ng F
or L
itter
-Den
mar
k Pa
rt of
the
Save
the
North
Sea
cam
paig
n w
hich
enc
oura
ges
fishe
rmen
to 'f
ish
for l
itter
', so
that
debr
is c
an b
e re
turn
ed to
a m
arin
e litt
er r
ecyc
ling
unit
in S
kage
n M
unic
ipal
ity.
http
://w
ww
.tve.
org/
ho/s
erie
s5/0
7_G
reen
%20
Curr
ents
_rep
orts
/repo
rt2.h
tml
Turk
ey:
Turk
ish
Mar
ine
Envi
ronm
ent P
rote
ctio
n A
ssoc
iatio
n (T
URM
EPA
)
Has
wor
ks to
mak
e th
e pu
blic
aw
are
of th
e im
porta
nce
of a
cle
an m
arin
e en
viro
nmen
t. In
add
ition
we
have
invo
lved
the
publ
ic, o
ur v
olun
teer
s an
d ou
r Sea
Sw
eepe
rs in
cle
anin
g ac
tivitie
s w
ith th
e ai
m to
ens
ure
that
futu
re g
ener
atio
ns c
ontin
ue to
enj
oy th
e he
alth
, lei
sure
and
eco
nom
ic b
enef
its
of th
e se
a.
http
://w
ww
.turm
epa.
org.
tr/en
/def
ault.
aspx
Cyp
rus:
Cypr
us M
arin
e En
viro
nmen
t Pro
tect
ion
Ass
ocia
tion
(CY
MEP
A)
Was
for
med
with
the
initia
tive
of th
e In
tern
atio
nal S
hipp
ing
Com
mun
ity o
f Cyp
rus
with
the
supp
ort
of th
e Co
mm
erci
al C
omm
unity
of t
he is
land
. CY
MEP
A is
an
auto
nom
ous,
not
-for
-pro
fit o
rgan
izat
ion
fund
ed s
olel
y by
its
mem
bers
. ht
tp://
ww
w.c
ymep
a.or
g.cy
/cgi
-bin
/ban
ner.c
gi?u
rl=ht
tp://
ww
w.c
ymep
a.or
g.cy
/
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment90
Natio
nal l
egis
latio
n an
d in
itiat
ives
UK:
Envi
ronm
ent A
ctCo
mpe
tent
aut
horit
ies
are
resp
onsi
ble
for k
eepi
ng th
eir l
and
clea
r of l
itter
.ht
tp://
ww
w.le
gisl
atio
n.go
v.uk
/ukp
ga/1
995/
25/c
onte
nts
Mer
chan
t Shi
ppin
g Re
gula
tions
:- P
reve
ntio
n of
Pol
lutio
nPo
llutio
n zo
ne 2
00 n
m o
ff th
e co
ast o
f the
UK.
http
://w
ww
.legi
slat
ion.
gov.
uk/u
kpga
/199
5/21
/con
tent
s
- Por
t Was
te R
ecep
tion
Faci
lities
Requ
ire a
ll por
ts to
pro
vide
rece
ptio
n fa
ciliti
es f
or w
aste
.
- Pre
vent
ion
of P
ollu
tion
by G
arba
gePr
ohib
it sh
ips
and
plat
form
s to
dis
pose
of p
last
ics
anyw
here
in th
e se
a.
Mar
itime
and
coas
tgua
rd a
genc
y (M
CA)
Has
cond
ucte
d a
pilo
t pro
ject
to e
stab
lish
met
hodo
logi
es a
nd g
uide
lines
to id
entif
y m
arin
e litt
er f
rom
ship
ping
.ht
tp://
ww
w.d
ft.go
v.uk
/mca
/
Mar
ine
Cons
erva
tion
Soci
ety
(MCS
)NG
O; t
wo
prog
ram
s: B
each
wat
ch a
nd A
dopt
-a-b
each
.ht
tp://
ww
w.m
csuk
.org
/Lo
cal in
itiativ
es
Cum
bria
Mar
ine
Litte
r Pro
ject
Aim
s to
qua
ntify
the
exte
nt a
nd n
atur
e of
the
mar
ine
litter
pro
blem
on
the
Cum
bria
n Co
ast a
nd fi
nd
solu
tions
to re
duce
it.
http
://lib
rary
.coa
stw
eb.in
fo/3
43/1
/Mic
roso
ft_W
ord_
-_2_
Cum
bria
_Mar
ine_
Litte
r.pdf
Ado
pt-a
-bea
chNa
tiona
l env
ironm
enta
l initia
tive
invo
lvin
g lo
cal c
omm
unitie
s in
car
ing
for t
heir
loca
l coa
stal
en
viro
nmen
t. G
roup
s an
d in
divi
dual
s al
l ove
r the
U.K
. are
giv
en th
e op
portu
nity
to a
dopt
thei
r fa
vour
ite s
tretc
h of
coa
st a
nd ta
ke p
art i
n be
ach
clea
ns a
nd s
urve
ys to
mon
itor c
oast
al p
ollu
tion
http
://w
ww
.egc
p.or
g.uk
/pro
ject
s/ad
opta
beac
h.ph
p
Natio
nal A
quat
ic L
itter
Gro
upA
ims
"To
achi
eve
a qu
antif
iabl
e re
duct
ion
in th
e am
ount
of l
itter
in ri
vers
and
the
sea
arou
nd th
e Un
ited
King
dom
from
dom
estic
and
inte
rnat
iona
l sou
rces
and
enh
ance
loca
l aqu
atic
env
ironm
ents
th
roug
h sy
stem
atic
pro
gram
mes
of w
ork.
"ht
tp://
ww
w.n
alg.
org.
uk/
Forth
Est
uary
For
um C
oast
al L
itter
Cam
paig
nA
ims
to "d
evel
op a
nd im
plem
ent a
com
mun
ity 'h
ands
on'
and
pub
lic a
war
enes
s-ra
isin
g pr
ogra
mm
e
inte
nded
to ta
ckle
and
mon
itor t
he is
sue
of m
arin
e an
d co
asta
l litte
r in
the
Firth
of F
orth
.ht
tp://
ww
w.fo
rthes
tuar
yfor
um.c
o.uk
/
Swed
en:
Envi
ronm
enta
l Cod
eSu
stai
nabl
e de
velo
pmen
t. Up
on e
nter
ing
a Sw
edis
h po
rt, v
esse
ls m
ust d
eliv
er w
aste
to a
rece
ptio
n fa
cility
.ht
tp://
ww
w.s
wed
en.g
ov.s
e/co
nten
t/1/c
6/02
/05/
49/6
736c
f92.
Denm
ark:
Hand
s O
n: F
ishi
ng F
or L
itter
-Den
mar
k Pa
rt of
the
Save
the
North
Sea
cam
paig
n w
hich
enc
oura
ges
fishe
rmen
to 'f
ish
for l
itter
', so
that
debr
is c
an b
e re
turn
ed to
a m
arin
e litt
er r
ecyc
ling
unit
in S
kage
n M
unic
ipal
ity.
http
://w
ww
.tve.
org/
ho/s
erie
s5/0
7_G
reen
%20
Curr
ents
_rep
orts
/repo
rt2.h
tml
Turk
ey:
Turk
ish
Mar
ine
Envi
ronm
ent P
rote
ctio
n A
ssoc
iatio
n (T
URM
EPA
)
Has
wor
ks to
mak
e th
e pu
blic
aw
are
of th
e im
porta
nce
of a
cle
an m
arin
e en
viro
nmen
t. In
add
ition
we
have
invo
lved
the
publ
ic, o
ur v
olun
teer
s an
d ou
r Sea
Sw
eepe
rs in
cle
anin
g ac
tivitie
s w
ith th
e ai
m to
ens
ure
that
futu
re g
ener
atio
ns c
ontin
ue to
enj
oy th
e he
alth
, lei
sure
and
eco
nom
ic b
enef
its
of th
e se
a.
http
://w
ww
.turm
epa.
org.
tr/en
/def
ault.
aspx
Cyp
rus:
Cypr
us M
arin
e En
viro
nmen
t Pro
tect
ion
Ass
ocia
tion
(CY
MEP
A)
Was
for
med
with
the
initia
tive
of th
e In
tern
atio
nal S
hipp
ing
Com
mun
ity o
f Cyp
rus
with
the
supp
ort
of th
e Co
mm
erci
al C
omm
unity
of t
he is
land
. CY
MEP
A is
an
auto
nom
ous,
not
-for
-pro
fit o
rgan
izat
ion
fund
ed s
olel
y by
its
mem
bers
. ht
tp://
ww
w.c
ymep
a.or
g.cy
/cgi
-bin
/ban
ner.c
gi?u
rl=ht
tp://
ww
w.c
ymep
a.or
g.cy
/
USA
:Sh
ore
Prot
ectio
n A
ctRe
duce
was
te b
eing
dep
osite
d in
coa
stal
wat
ers.
http
://w
ww
.epa
.gov
/regu
latio
ns/la
ws/
spa.
htm
lCl
ean
Wat
er A
ctht
tp://
ww
w.e
pa.g
ov/la
wsr
egs/
law
s/cw
a.ht
ml
Mar
ine
Plas
tic R
esea
rch
and
Cont
rol A
ctIm
plem
enta
tion
MA
RPO
L.ht
tp://
wat
er.e
pa.g
ov/ty
pe/o
ceb/
mar
ined
ebris
/law
sreg
s.cf
m
Envi
ronm
enta
l Pro
tect
ion
Age
ncy
Inno
vatio
ns in
coa
stal
pro
tect
ion:
sea
rchi
ng fo
r unc
omm
on s
olut
ions
to c
omm
on p
robl
ems.
http
://w
ww
.epa
.gov
/
Natio
nal C
lean
Boa
ting
Cam
paig
nA
natio
nwid
e pr
ogra
m o
f the
Mar
ine
Envi
ronm
ent E
duca
tion
Foun
datio
n.ht
tp://
ww
w.e
fita.
org/
Envi
ronm
ent-a
nd-N
atur
e/W
ater
-Res
ourc
es/O
rgan
izat
ions
/Nat
iona
l-Cle
an-B
oatin
g-Ca
mpa
ign-
deta
ils-2
4117
.htm
l
Ado
pt-a
-Bea
ch
Part
of th
e Pu
blic
Edu
catio
n Pr
ogra
mm
e of
the
Calif
orni
an C
oast
al C
omm
issi
on. A
ny g
roup
, pub
lic
or p
rivat
e ca
n vo
lunt
eer t
o cl
ean
any
of o
ne o
f the
ado
ptab
le b
each
es.
http
://w
ww
.coa
stal
.ca.
gov/
publ
iced
/aab
/aab
1.ht
ml
Mon
ofila
men
t Rec
over
y an
d Re
cycl
ing
Prog
ram
A st
atew
ide
effo
rt by
the
Flor
ida
Fish
and
Wild
life
Cons
erva
tion
Com
mis
sion
and
its
partn
ers
to
educ
ate
the
publ
ic o
n th
e pr
oble
ms
caus
ed b
y m
onof
ilam
ent l
ine
left
in th
e en
viro
nmen
t, to
en
cour
age
recy
clin
g th
roug
h a
netw
ork
of li
ne re
cycl
ing
bins
and
dro
p-of
f loc
atio
ns, a
nd to
co
nduc
t vol
unte
er m
onof
ilam
ent l
ine
clea
nup
even
ts.
http
://m
rrp.
myf
wc.
com
/
Coas
tSw
eep
Clea
n-up
s
Co-o
rdin
ated
by
Mas
sach
uset
ts C
oast
al Z
one
Man
agem
ent a
nd o
rgan
ized
by
loca
l vol
unte
ers,
are
held
at m
ore
than
80
loca
tions
thro
ugho
ut th
e st
ate.
In 2
001,
0ve
r 5,0
00 v
olun
teer
s tu
rned
out
to
rem
ove
hund
reds
of t
hous
ands
of p
iece
s of
deb
ris a
long
alm
ost 2
00 m
iles
of c
oast
line.
http
://w
ww
.mas
s.go
v/cz
m/p
rcst
sw.h
tm
Beac
h Sw
eep
Thes
e ar
e or
gani
zed
by th
e Cl
ean
Oce
an A
ctio
n an
d is
one
of th
e lo
nges
t run
ning
cle
anup
s in
the
wor
ld. T
he fi
rst o
ne w
as c
ondu
cted
in 1
985
at S
andy
Hoo
k w
ith 7
5 vo
lunt
eers
.ht
tp://
ww
w.c
lean
ocea
nact
ion.
org/
inde
x.ph
p?id
=153
Urba
n Li
tter P
artn
ersh
ip to
Pre
vent
Litt
er a
nd Ill
egal
Dum
ping
An
initia
tive
in th
e Un
ited
Stat
es. T
he A
mer
ican
Pla
stic
s Co
unci
l (A
PC),
Keep
Am
eric
a Be
autif
ul a
nd
the
U.S.
Con
fere
nce
of M
ayor
s ar
e le
adin
g a
natio
nal U
rban
Litt
er P
artn
ersh
ip, a
pro
gram
whi
ch
will
focu
s on
gat
herin
g av
aila
ble
data
on
the
caus
es a
nd e
ffec
ts o
f litt
erin
g in
urb
an s
ettin
gs, a
nd
prov
ide
quan
titat
ive
info
rmat
ion
on th
e be
st p
ract
ices
bei
ng e
mpl
oyed
to p
reve
nt it
.
http
://w
ww
.kab
.org
/site
/Pag
eSer
ver?
page
nam
e=ur
ban_
partn
ersh
ips_
to_p
reve
nt_l
itter
Unite
d St
ates
Env
ironm
enta
l Pro
tect
ion
Age
ncy
Coas
tal C
ookb
ook
Inno
vatio
ns in
Coa
stal
Pro
tect
ion:
Sea
rchi
ng fo
r Unc
omm
on S
olut
ions
to C
omm
on P
robl
ems'
, mor
e co
mm
only
ref
erre
d to
as
the
'coa
stal
coo
kboo
k', is
an
orga
nize
d co
llect
ion
of s
ucce
ssfu
l coa
stal
pr
otec
tion
initia
tives
fro
m a
cros
s th
e U.
S an
d in
clud
es: M
arin
e De
bris
Col
lect
ion
and
Recy
clin
g Pr
ogra
m, R
educ
tion
of F
oam
Deb
ris: F
oam
Enc
apsu
latio
n fo
r Flo
atin
g St
ruct
ures
in O
rego
n, F
ish
Net C
olle
ctio
n an
d Re
cycl
ing.
Natio
nal O
cean
ic a
nd A
tmos
pher
ic A
ssoc
iatio
n (N
OA
A)
Mar
ine
Debr
is P
rogr
am's
mis
sion
sta
tem
ent i
s to
sup
port
a na
tiona
l eff
ort f
ocus
ed o
n pr
even
ting,
id
entif
ying
, rem
ovin
g, a
nd re
duci
ng th
e oc
curr
ence
of m
arin
e de
bris
and
to p
rote
ct a
nd c
onse
rve
our n
atio
n’s
natu
ral r
esou
rces
and
coa
stal
wat
erw
ays
from
the
impa
cts
of m
arin
e de
bris
. The
NO
AA
MDP
is c
omm
itted
to a
ddre
ssin
g de
bris
in th
e m
arin
e en
viro
nmen
t on
a na
tiona
l and
an
inte
rnat
iona
l leve
l.
http
://w
ww
.noa
a.go
v/
Puge
t Sou
nd M
icro
plas
tics
Inst
itute
You
th a
nd a
dult
parti
cipa
nts
wor
k w
ith s
cien
tists
to c
olle
ct s
ampl
es f
rom
the
surf
ace
wat
er, s
ea
floor
, and
bea
ches
. Thi
s in
clud
es s
tude
nts
gath
erin
g w
ater
sam
ples
dur
ing
Disc
over
y V
oyag
es o
n th
e SE
A ve
ssel
Indi
go, g
uide
d by
UW
T re
sear
cher
Jul
ie M
asur
a or
res
earc
h as
sist
ants
, usi
ng a
sp
ecia
l col
lect
ion
net J
ulie
ada
pted
from
a la
rge-
scal
e m
anta
net
. The
wat
er s
ampl
es a
re
proc
esse
d in
the
labo
rato
ry b
y st
uden
ts o
r sci
entis
ts to
det
erm
ine
the
amou
nt o
f pla
stic
in th
e sa
mpl
es. T
he P
SMI c
oord
inat
es s
ampl
e co
llect
ion
by o
ther
com
mun
ity p
artn
ers.
Dat
a ar
e us
ed to
be
tter u
nder
stan
d th
e co
ncen
tratio
n an
d di
strib
utio
n of
pla
stic
in P
uget
Sou
nd. S
cien
tists
and
st
uden
ts w
ork
toge
ther
to c
hara
cter
ize
the
sour
ce a
nd ro
utes
of m
icro
plas
tics,
incl
udin
g di
scov
erin
g "g
arba
ge p
atch
es" i
n Pu
get S
ound
. Dat
a re
sults
will
be p
oste
d on
line
usin
g G
oogl
e M
aps
tech
nolo
gy a
nd a
vaila
ble
to a
ll.
http
://w
ww
.ser
vice
educ
atio
nadv
entu
re.o
rg/m
icro
plas
tics.
php
Port
Tow
nsen
d M
arin
e Sc
ienc
e Ce
ntre
Disc
over
ing
nurd
les
on o
ur "p
ristin
e" s
tretc
h of
bea
ch b
roug
ht h
ome
to u
s th
e re
ality
of p
last
ics
in
loca
l wat
ers.
Soo
n w
e w
ere
colla
bora
ting
with
the
Calif
orni
a-ba
sed
Alg
alita
Mar
ine
Rese
arch
Fo
unda
tion,
whi
ch h
as b
een
stud
ying
and
teac
hing
abo
ut th
e al
arm
ing
accu
mul
atio
n of
pla
stic
in
the
North
Pac
ific.
We
deci
ded
to b
egin
an
educ
atio
n pr
ogra
m a
nd to
do
rese
arch
to le
arn
abou
t the
ex
tent
of p
last
ics
cont
amin
atio
n in
the
Puge
t Sou
nd re
gion
.
http
://w
ww
.ptm
sc.o
rg/p
last
ics.
htm
l
Can
ada:
Envi
ronm
ent C
anad
a so
lutio
nsPr
ovid
es a
num
ber o
f exa
mpl
es o
f wha
t can
be
done
to p
reve
nt m
arin
e litt
er, p
rese
nted
by
Envi
ronm
ent C
anad
a ht
tp://
ww
w.e
c.gc
.ca/
Publ
icat
ions
/def
ault.
asp?
lang
=En&
xml=
0EC6
7A2B
-936
4-4E
65-8
983-
F903
FF1B
F777
Pitc
h-in
Can
ada
natio
nal m
arin
e de
bris
sur
veilla
nce
prog
ram
Co-o
rdin
ated
by
the
orga
niza
tion
Pitc
h-In
-Can
ada
in c
o-op
erat
ion
with
Env
ironm
ent C
anad
a's
Mar
ine
Envi
ronm
ent D
ivis
ion.
It is
des
igne
d to
pro
vide
det
aile
d da
ta o
n th
e pr
oble
m o
f mar
ine
debr
is
by s
tudy
ing
wha
t is
was
hed
up o
n th
e be
ach.
ht
tp://
ww
w.p
itch-
in.c
a/M
arin
e/E-
Mar
ine1
.htm
l
Beac
h Sw
eeps
Impr
ove
coas
tal e
nviro
nmen
ts; i
nfor
m th
e pu
blic
abo
ut th
e ex
tent
and
impa
ct o
f mar
ine
debr
is;
colle
ct d
ata
for f
utur
e st
udie
s; e
ncou
rage
peo
ple
to b
ehav
e in
a m
ore
envi
ronm
enta
lly-f
riend
ly
man
ner;
and
help
indi
vidu
als
and
grou
ps o
rgan
ize
a sa
fe, e
duca
tiona
l and
fun
activ
ity.
http
://w
ww
.glf.
dfo-
mpo
.gc.
ca/e
ng/B
each
_Sw
eep/
Hom
e
Gre
at N
ova
Scot
ia P
ick
me
up!
Cam
paig
n co
ordi
nate
d by
Cle
an N
ova
Scot
ia th
at e
ncou
rage
s No
va S
cotia
ns to
get
toge
ther
to p
ick
up lit
ter.
http
://w
ww
.cle
an.n
s.ca
/
Cana
dian
Oce
an H
abita
t Pro
tect
ion
Soci
ety
Non-
gove
rnm
enta
l org
aniz
atio
n de
dica
ted
to e
xplo
ring,
und
erst
andi
ng, p
rote
ctin
g an
d re
stor
ing
East
ern
Cana
da's
"in
cred
ible
nor
ther
n co
ral f
ores
ts a
nd th
ose
fishe
ries
that
can
coe
xist
with
th
em.
http
://w
ww
.une
p.or
g/re
gion
alse
as/m
arin
elitt
er/o
ther
/cle
anup
s/de
faul
t.asp
Berm
uda:
Keep
Ber
mud
a Be
autif
ulDe
dica
ted
to a
ctio
n ag
ains
t the
pro
lifer
atio
n of
litte
r and
oth
er e
nviro
nmen
tal c
ondi
tions
dam
agin
g
to th
e be
auty
of B
erm
uda.
http
://w
ww
.kbb
.bm
/
Haw
aii:
Mar
ine
debr
is c
lean
-up
The
North
wes
tern
Haw
aiia
n Is
land
s is
co-
ordi
nate
d th
roug
h a
mul
ti-ag
ency
par
tner
ship
mad
e up
of
the
Natio
nal M
arin
e Fi
sher
ies
Serv
ice
Hono
lulu
Lab
; the
U.S
. Coa
st G
uard
, Nat
iona
l Oce
an
Serv
ice,
the
Haw
ai'i S
ea G
rant
; the
Oce
an C
onse
rvan
cy; t
he U
.S. F
ish
and
Wild
life
Serv
ice;
the
City
& C
ount
y of
Hon
olul
u; a
nd th
e NO
AA
Rese
arch
Ves
sel T
owns
end
Crom
wel
l.
http
://w
ww
.une
p.or
g/re
gion
alse
as/m
arin
elitt
er/o
ther
/cle
anup
s/de
faul
t.asp
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 91
Braz
il:
Loca
l Bea
ch, G
loba
l Gar
bage
Proj
ect c
reat
ed a
nd ru
n by
Bra
zilia
n ph
otog
raph
er F
abia
no P
rado
Bar
retto
, fro
m th
e ci
ty o
f Sa
lvad
or d
a Ba
hia,
Bra
zil.
The
Loca
l Bea
ch -
Glo
bal G
arba
ge p
roje
ct in
clud
es a
pho
to e
xhib
itions
an
d th
e di
strib
utio
n of
a p
oste
r (po
ster
imag
e) a
nd s
ticke
rs o
f the
pro
ject
logo
to p
orts
wor
ldw
ide.
Fa
bian
o Pr
ado
Barr
etto
has
mad
e ca
talo
gues
of t
he m
arin
e litt
er h
e ha
s fo
und
on d
iffer
ent
Braz
ilian
beac
hes.
http
://w
ww
.glo
balg
arba
ge.o
rg/b
log/
Aus
tral
ia:
Aus
tralia
's O
cean
Pol
icy
Gov
ernm
ent w
ill un
derta
ke a
ctio
n to
pre
vent
ext
inct
ion
of s
peci
es a
nd a
dver
se e
ffec
ts o
f po
llutio
n.ht
tp://
ww
w.e
nviro
nmen
t.gov
.au/
coas
ts/o
cean
s-po
licy/
inde
x.ht
ml
Aus
tralia
n En
viro
nmen
tal P
rote
ctio
n an
d Bi
odiv
ersi
ty C
onse
rvat
ion
Act
Inju
ry a
nd fa
tality
as
a co
nseq
uenc
e of
mar
ine
debr
is is
list
ed h
ere
as a
key
thre
at.
http
://w
ww
.env
ironm
ent.g
ov.a
u/ep
bc/in
dex.
htm
lDe
partm
ent o
f Env
ironm
ent a
nd H
erita
ge:
- Pla
stic
Bag
Red
uctio
n Ca
mpa
ign
Redu
ce im
pact
of p
last
ic b
ag o
n A
ustra
lian
envi
ronm
ent.
http
://pl
astic
bags
.pla
neta
rk.o
rg/
- Mar
ine
Was
te R
ecep
tion
Faci
lities
Cam
paig
nA
ssis
t por
ts a
nd m
arin
e fa
ciltie
s in
pro
vidi
ng w
aste
rece
ptio
n fa
ciliti
es.
- Pla
n fo
r Mar
ine
Turtl
esi.e
. Ide
ntify
ing
sour
ces
of m
arin
e de
bris
and
qua
ntify
ass
ocia
ted
mor
tality
rat
es.
Aus
tralia
n M
aritim
e Sa
fety
Aut
horit
y (A
MSA
)Pu
blis
hed
broc
hure
s of
goo
d w
aste
man
agem
ent p
ract
ices
.ht
tp://
ww
w.a
msa
.gov
.au/
Aus
tralia
n an
d Ne
w Z
eala
nd E
nviro
nmen
t and
Con
serv
atio
n Co
unci
lPr
actic
al a
dvic
e on
the
impl
emen
tatio
n of
MA
RPO
L.ht
tp://
ww
w.e
nviro
nmen
t.gov
.au/
abou
t/cou
ncils
/anz
ecc/
inde
x.ht
ml
Code
of C
ondu
ct fo
r Res
pons
ible
Sea
food
Indu
stry
Base
d on
FO
A co
de fo
r Res
pons
ible
Fis
herie
s, in
clud
es 1
2 pr
inci
ples
for
con
serv
ing
fish
stoc
ks.
http
://w
ww
.pir.
sa.g
ov.a
u/fis
herie
s/pd
f_eq
uiva
lent
s/se
afoo
d_in
dust
ry_c
ode_
of_c
ondu
ct
Clea
n Up
Aus
tralia
Day
Clea
ning
bea
ches
alo
ng th
e A
ustra
lian
Coas
t sin
ce 1
990.
http
://w
ww
.cle
anup
.org
.au/
au/
Coas
tcar
e
Maj
or c
ompo
nent
of C
oast
s an
d Cl
ean
Seas
, the
Com
mon
wea
lth G
over
nmen
t's m
arin
e an
d co
asta
l co
nser
vatio
n in
itiativ
e un
der t
he N
atur
al H
erita
ge T
rust
in A
ustra
lia. I
t is
a na
tiona
l pro
gram
that
en
cour
ages
com
mun
ity in
volv
emen
t in
the
prot
ectio
n, m
anag
emen
t and
reha
bilita
tion
of A
ustra
lia's
co
asta
l and
mar
ine
envi
ronm
ents
.
http
://w
ww
.coa
stca
re.c
om.a
u/
Gou
ld L
eagu
e Ba
y Li
tter W
atch
Aus
tralia
's le
adin
g en
viro
nmen
tal e
duca
tion
orga
nisa
tion
seek
s to
cre
ate
on-th
e-gr
ound
m
easu
rabl
e im
prov
emen
ts to
the
envi
ronm
ent t
hrou
gh it
s ed
ucat
ion
prog
ram
mes
, con
sulta
ncy,
publ
icat
ions
and
oth
er a
ctiv
ities.
http
://w
ww
.gou
ld.e
du.a
u/m
edia
/new
s.as
p
Min
imal
impa
ct b
oatin
g in
itiativ
e (T
asm
ania
)
Proj
ect c
o-or
dina
ted
by th
e Ta
sman
ian
Envi
ronm
ent C
entre
to e
ncou
rage
boa
ters
to a
dopt
pr
actic
es w
hich
redu
ce th
e ad
vers
e im
pact
of s
mal
l boa
t use
on
the
mar
ine
and
coas
tal
envi
ronm
ents
.The
pro
ject
edu
cate
s bo
ater
s on
way
s to
ens
ure
that
the
sea
and
coas
ts a
re k
ept
clea
n fr
om lit
ter,
pollu
tion
and
intro
duce
d m
arin
e pe
sts.
http
://w
ww
.env
ironm
ent.t
as.g
ov.a
u/in
dex.
aspx
?bas
e=13
7
New
Zea
land
:
Seaw
eek
Mar
ine
Debr
is P
rogr
amO
rgan
ized
by
the
Mar
ine
Educ
atio
n So
ciet
y of
Aot
earo
a (N
Z), a
nd in
clud
es B
each
Cle
an U
p
activ
ities
and
mar
ine
debr
is s
urve
ys.
http
://w
ww
.une
p.or
g/re
gion
alse
as/m
arin
elitt
er/o
ther
/cle
anup
s/de
faul
t.asp
Repu
blic
of K
orea
:
Kore
a In
stitu
te o
f Shi
ps a
nd O
cean
Eng
inee
ring
seve
ral p
roje
cts
Surv
eys
of m
arin
e litt
er in
coa
stal
and
por
t are
asht
tp://
ww
w.a
pec-
vc.o
r.kr/?
p_na
me=
web
site
&got
opag
e=50
&que
ry=v
iew
&uni
que_
num
=WD2
0060
0019
9
Clea
n-up
of m
arin
e litt
er
Prev
entio
n of
inpu
t of m
arin
e litt
er in
coa
stal
env
ironm
ents
, esp
ecia
lly f
rom
land
-bas
ed s
ourc
es
Tech
nica
l impr
ovem
ent o
f equ
ipem
ent a
nd fa
ciliti
es f
or s
urve
ys
Prev
entio
n of
inpu
t, pr
omot
ion
of r
e-us
e an
d di
spos
al o
f col
lect
ed m
ater
ials
Rele
vant
lega
l and
inst
itutio
nal a
gree
men
tsJa
pan:
Japa
n En
viro
nmen
tal A
ctio
n Ne
twor
k (J
EAN)
Join
ed th
e In
tern
atio
nal C
oast
al C
lean
up (I
CC),
in 1
990.
JEA
N h
olds
two
cam
paig
ns e
ach
year
; the
sp
ring
cam
paig
n da
tes
incl
udes
Ear
th D
ay &
Env
ironm
ent W
eek
focu
sed
on e
nviro
nmen
tal
awar
enes
s, th
e au
tum
n IC
C c
ampa
ign
enco
urag
es p
artic
ipan
ts to
col
lect
and
sen
d da
ta o
n tra
sh
for r
esul
ts f
or a
naly
sis.
http
://w
ww
.jean
.jp/e
_ind
ex.h
tml
Oth
er a
reas
:
Mar
ine
Debr
is in
the
Falkl
and
Isla
nds
Prov
ides
info
rmat
ion
by F
alkla
nds
Cons
erva
tion
on th
e pr
oble
m o
f mar
ine
litter
and
shi
ppin
g m
easu
res
that
sho
uld
be a
dopt
ed to
mitig
ate
the
prob
lem
.ht
tp://
ww
w.n
cbi.n
lm.n
ih.g
ov/p
ubm
ed/1
4643
779
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment92
Braz
il:
Loca
l Bea
ch, G
loba
l Gar
bage
Proj
ect c
reat
ed a
nd ru
n by
Bra
zilia
n ph
otog
raph
er F
abia
no P
rado
Bar
retto
, fro
m th
e ci
ty o
f Sa
lvad
or d
a Ba
hia,
Bra
zil.
The
Loca
l Bea
ch -
Glo
bal G
arba
ge p
roje
ct in
clud
es a
pho
to e
xhib
itions
an
d th
e di
strib
utio
n of
a p
oste
r (po
ster
imag
e) a
nd s
ticke
rs o
f the
pro
ject
logo
to p
orts
wor
ldw
ide.
Fa
bian
o Pr
ado
Barr
etto
has
mad
e ca
talo
gues
of t
he m
arin
e litt
er h
e ha
s fo
und
on d
iffer
ent
Braz
ilian
beac
hes.
http
://w
ww
.glo
balg
arba
ge.o
rg/b
log/
Aus
tral
ia:
Aus
tralia
's O
cean
Pol
icy
Gov
ernm
ent w
ill un
derta
ke a
ctio
n to
pre
vent
ext
inct
ion
of s
peci
es a
nd a
dver
se e
ffec
ts o
f po
llutio
n.ht
tp://
ww
w.e
nviro
nmen
t.gov
.au/
coas
ts/o
cean
s-po
licy/
inde
x.ht
ml
Aus
tralia
n En
viro
nmen
tal P
rote
ctio
n an
d Bi
odiv
ersi
ty C
onse
rvat
ion
Act
Inju
ry a
nd fa
tality
as
a co
nseq
uenc
e of
mar
ine
debr
is is
list
ed h
ere
as a
key
thre
at.
http
://w
ww
.env
ironm
ent.g
ov.a
u/ep
bc/in
dex.
htm
lDe
partm
ent o
f Env
ironm
ent a
nd H
erita
ge:
- Pla
stic
Bag
Red
uctio
n Ca
mpa
ign
Redu
ce im
pact
of p
last
ic b
ag o
n A
ustra
lian
envi
ronm
ent.
http
://pl
astic
bags
.pla
neta
rk.o
rg/
- Mar
ine
Was
te R
ecep
tion
Faci
lities
Cam
paig
nA
ssis
t por
ts a
nd m
arin
e fa
ciltie
s in
pro
vidi
ng w
aste
rece
ptio
n fa
ciliti
es.
- Pla
n fo
r Mar
ine
Turtl
esi.e
. Ide
ntify
ing
sour
ces
of m
arin
e de
bris
and
qua
ntify
ass
ocia
ted
mor
tality
rat
es.
Aus
tralia
n M
aritim
e Sa
fety
Aut
horit
y (A
MSA
)Pu
blis
hed
broc
hure
s of
goo
d w
aste
man
agem
ent p
ract
ices
.ht
tp://
ww
w.a
msa
.gov
.au/
Aus
tralia
n an
d Ne
w Z
eala
nd E
nviro
nmen
t and
Con
serv
atio
n Co
unci
lPr
actic
al a
dvic
e on
the
impl
emen
tatio
n of
MA
RPO
L.ht
tp://
ww
w.e
nviro
nmen
t.gov
.au/
abou
t/cou
ncils
/anz
ecc/
inde
x.ht
ml
Code
of C
ondu
ct fo
r Res
pons
ible
Sea
food
Indu
stry
Base
d on
FO
A co
de fo
r Res
pons
ible
Fis
herie
s, in
clud
es 1
2 pr
inci
ples
for
con
serv
ing
fish
stoc
ks.
http
://w
ww
.pir.
sa.g
ov.a
u/fis
herie
s/pd
f_eq
uiva
lent
s/se
afoo
d_in
dust
ry_c
ode_
of_c
ondu
ct
Clea
n Up
Aus
tralia
Day
Clea
ning
bea
ches
alo
ng th
e A
ustra
lian
Coas
t sin
ce 1
990.
http
://w
ww
.cle
anup
.org
.au/
au/
Coas
tcar
e
Maj
or c
ompo
nent
of C
oast
s an
d Cl
ean
Seas
, the
Com
mon
wea
lth G
over
nmen
t's m
arin
e an
d co
asta
l co
nser
vatio
n in
itiativ
e un
der t
he N
atur
al H
erita
ge T
rust
in A
ustra
lia. I
t is
a na
tiona
l pro
gram
that
en
cour
ages
com
mun
ity in
volv
emen
t in
the
prot
ectio
n, m
anag
emen
t and
reha
bilita
tion
of A
ustra
lia's
co
asta
l and
mar
ine
envi
ronm
ents
.
http
://w
ww
.coa
stca
re.c
om.a
u/
Gou
ld L
eagu
e Ba
y Li
tter W
atch
Aus
tralia
's le
adin
g en
viro
nmen
tal e
duca
tion
orga
nisa
tion
seek
s to
cre
ate
on-th
e-gr
ound
m
easu
rabl
e im
prov
emen
ts to
the
envi
ronm
ent t
hrou
gh it
s ed
ucat
ion
prog
ram
mes
, con
sulta
ncy,
publ
icat
ions
and
oth
er a
ctiv
ities.
http
://w
ww
.gou
ld.e
du.a
u/m
edia
/new
s.as
p
Min
imal
impa
ct b
oatin
g in
itiativ
e (T
asm
ania
)
Proj
ect c
o-or
dina
ted
by th
e Ta
sman
ian
Envi
ronm
ent C
entre
to e
ncou
rage
boa
ters
to a
dopt
pr
actic
es w
hich
redu
ce th
e ad
vers
e im
pact
of s
mal
l boa
t use
on
the
mar
ine
and
coas
tal
envi
ronm
ents
.The
pro
ject
edu
cate
s bo
ater
s on
way
s to
ens
ure
that
the
sea
and
coas
ts a
re k
ept
clea
n fr
om lit
ter,
pollu
tion
and
intro
duce
d m
arin
e pe
sts.
http
://w
ww
.env
ironm
ent.t
as.g
ov.a
u/in
dex.
aspx
?bas
e=13
7
New
Zea
land
:
Seaw
eek
Mar
ine
Debr
is P
rogr
amO
rgan
ized
by
the
Mar
ine
Educ
atio
n So
ciet
y of
Aot
earo
a (N
Z), a
nd in
clud
es B
each
Cle
an U
p
activ
ities
and
mar
ine
debr
is s
urve
ys.
http
://w
ww
.une
p.or
g/re
gion
alse
as/m
arin
elitt
er/o
ther
/cle
anup
s/de
faul
t.asp
Repu
blic
of K
orea
:
Kore
a In
stitu
te o
f Shi
ps a
nd O
cean
Eng
inee
ring
seve
ral p
roje
cts
Surv
eys
of m
arin
e litt
er in
coa
stal
and
por
t are
asht
tp://
ww
w.a
pec-
vc.o
r.kr/?
p_na
me=
web
site
&got
opag
e=50
&que
ry=v
iew
&uni
que_
num
=WD2
0060
0019
9
Clea
n-up
of m
arin
e litt
er
Prev
entio
n of
inpu
t of m
arin
e litt
er in
coa
stal
env
ironm
ents
, esp
ecia
lly f
rom
land
-bas
ed s
ourc
es
Tech
nica
l impr
ovem
ent o
f equ
ipem
ent a
nd fa
ciliti
es f
or s
urve
ys
Prev
entio
n of
inpu
t, pr
omot
ion
of r
e-us
e an
d di
spos
al o
f col
lect
ed m
ater
ials
Rele
vant
lega
l and
inst
itutio
nal a
gree
men
tsJa
pan:
Japa
n En
viro
nmen
tal A
ctio
n Ne
twor
k (J
EAN)
Join
ed th
e In
tern
atio
nal C
oast
al C
lean
up (I
CC),
in 1
990.
JEA
N h
olds
two
cam
paig
ns e
ach
year
; the
sp
ring
cam
paig
n da
tes
incl
udes
Ear
th D
ay &
Env
ironm
ent W
eek
focu
sed
on e
nviro
nmen
tal
awar
enes
s, th
e au
tum
n IC
C c
ampa
ign
enco
urag
es p
artic
ipan
ts to
col
lect
and
sen
d da
ta o
n tra
sh
for r
esul
ts f
or a
naly
sis.
http
://w
ww
.jean
.jp/e
_ind
ex.h
tml
Oth
er a
reas
:
Mar
ine
Debr
is in
the
Falkl
and
Isla
nds
Prov
ides
info
rmat
ion
by F
alkla
nds
Cons
erva
tion
on th
e pr
oble
m o
f mar
ine
litter
and
shi
ppin
g m
easu
res
that
sho
uld
be a
dopt
ed to
mitig
ate
the
prob
lem
.ht
tp://
ww
w.n
cbi.n
lm.n
ih.g
ov/p
ubm
ed/1
4643
779
Org
aniz
atio
n in
volv
edPr
ogra
m n
ame
Cou
ntry
/ re
gion
Type
of
orga
ni-
zatio
n
Type
of
prog
ram
Run
ning
tim
eAi
ms
Web
site
Net
herl
ands
Pla
stic
Sou
p Fo
unda
tion
Pla
stic
Sou
p Fo
unda
tion
Net
herla
nds
NG
OLo
bbyi
ng20
10Th
e Pl
astic
Sou
p Fo
unda
tions
aim
s to
not
ify th
e w
orld
of t
his
prob
lem
, st
artin
g in
the
Net
herla
nds.
http
://w
ww
.pla
stic
soup
foun
datio
n.or
g/ch
arle
s.ph
p
Inst
ituut
voor
Mili
euvr
aags
tukk
en (I
VM )
Mic
ropl
astic
s re
sear
chN
ethe
rland
sre
sear
chin
terd
isci
plin
ary
rese
arch
pr
ogra
msi
nce
2011
IVM
has
form
ed a
n in
terd
isci
plin
ary
rese
arch
team
lead
by P
rof.
dr. J
acob
de
Boe
r in
whi
ch c
hem
ists
, eco
nom
ists
, pol
icy
expe
rts, e
nviro
nmen
tal l
aw
expe
rts a
nd e
coto
xico
logi
sts
are
all i
nvol
ved.
The
aim
is to
com
e to
un
ders
tand
the
exte
nt o
f mic
ropl
astic
pol
lutio
n in
the
envir
onm
ent a
nd it
s ec
olog
ical
impa
ct, b
ut a
lso
to in
vest
igat
e op
tions
and
cos
ts o
f miti
gatio
n an
d de
vise
gov
erna
nce
stra
tegi
es to
sol
ve th
is p
robl
em.
http
://w
ww
.ivm
.vu.
nl/e
n/ne
ws-
and-
agen
da/IV
M-N
ewsl
ette
r/Arc
hive
/Sep
tem
ber-
2010
/Che
mis
try-a
nd-B
iolo
gy/in
dex.
asp
RW
S N
oord
zee,
KIM
O a
nd S
ticht
ing
de
Noo
rdze
eZw
erve
nd la
ngs
Zee
Net
herla
nds
NG
Ore
sear
ch &
ed
ucat
ion
sinc
e 20
10C
lean
ing
up D
utch
bea
ches
and
rais
ing
awar
enes
s am
ong
the
gene
ral
publ
ic.
http
://w
ww
.zw
erve
ndla
ngsz
ee.n
l/
Kom
mun
es In
tern
asjo
nale
M
iljoo
rgan
isas
jon
(KIM
O)
Mic
ropl
astic
s re
sear
chN
orth
Sea
rese
arch
mon
itorin
g20
09
A re
sear
ch p
rogr
amm
e to
add
ress
MP
s us
ing
a ra
nge
of d
iffer
ing
polym
er
type
s (in
clud
ing
plas
tics
of d
iffer
ing
size
and
age
) and
con
tam
inan
ts.
Upt
ake
of c
onta
min
ants
toge
ther
with
any
ass
ocia
ted
biol
ogic
al
cons
eque
nces
will
be
eval
uate
d us
ing
depo
sit a
nd fi
lter f
eedi
ng m
arin
e or
gani
sms.
http
://w
ww
.kim
oint
erna
tiona
l.org
/Mic
roP
last
icR
esea
rch.
aspx
OS
PAR
OS
PAR
Pilo
t Pro
ject
on
Mon
itorin
g M
arin
e B
each
Litt
erN
orth
-Eas
t Atla
ntic
rese
arch
mon
itorin
g20
00-2
006
The
six-
year
OS
PAR
Pilo
t Pro
ject
on
Mon
itorin
g M
arin
e Be
ach
Litte
r (2
000–
2006
) has
bee
n th
e fir
st re
gion
-wid
e at
tem
pt in
Eur
ope
to d
evel
op a
st
anda
rd m
etho
d fo
r mon
itorin
g m
arin
e lit
ter o
n be
ache
s in
Eur
ope
and,
us
ing
this
sta
ndar
dise
d m
etho
d, to
ass
ess
pres
ence
of m
arin
e lit
ter o
n th
e be
ache
s in
the
OS
PAR
regi
on.
http
://w
ww
.noo
rdze
e.nl
/upl
oad/
doss
iers
/OS
PAR
.Litt
er-P
ilot-P
roje
ct-F
inal
-Rep
ort.p
df
IMAR
ES
Fulm
ar s
tudi
esN
orth
-Eas
t Atla
ntic
rese
arch
mon
itorin
gsi
nce
2002
Sci
entis
t Jan
And
ries
van
Fran
eker
of I
MAR
ES
inve
stig
ates
sto
mac
h co
nten
ts o
f Nor
ther
n Fu
lmar
s be
ache
d in
the
Net
herla
nds.
The
se s
eabi
rds
acci
dent
ally
inge
st p
last
ic d
ebris
. The
abu
ndan
ce o
f pla
stic
in th
e st
omac
hs is
a u
sefu
l mon
itorin
g to
ol fo
r the
am
ount
of m
arin
e lit
ter i
n th
e N
orth
Sea
.
http
://w
ww
.imar
es.w
ur.n
l/UK
/rese
arch
/dos
sier
s/pl
astic
/
Prog
ram
s in
the
regi
on N
orth
Sea
INB
O, V
LIZ
en U
nive
rsite
it G
ent:
onde
rzoe
ksgr
oep
Eco
tox
Asse
ssm
ent o
f Mar
ine
Deb
ris (A
S-M
ADE
)B
elgi
umgo
vern
men
tM
onito
ring
To s
tudy
the
pres
ence
of m
arin
e de
bris
(inc
ludi
ng th
e br
eak-
dow
n/de
grad
atio
n pr
oduc
ts, e
.g. m
icro
pla
stic
s) in
the
Belg
ian
mar
ine
envi
ronm
ent,
base
d on
the
avai
labl
e lit
erat
ure
data
and
on
dedi
cate
d qu
antit
ativ
e m
onito
ring
surv
eys
of th
e se
abed
, the
sea
-sur
face
and
the
beac
h, to
ass
ess
the
effe
cts
of th
is d
ebris
(inc
ludi
ng p
ossi
ble
asso
ciat
ed
mic
ro-c
onta
min
ants
) on
sele
cted
mar
ine
spec
ies
(inve
rtebr
ates
and
bi
rds)
, to
eval
uate
the
finan
cial
impa
ct o
f thi
s fo
rm o
f pol
lutio
n (r
emov
al v
s.
prev
entio
n), t
o de
velo
p an
d ev
alua
te s
cien
ce-b
ased
pol
icy
eval
uatio
n to
ols.
http
://w
ww
.vliz
.be/
proj
ects
/as-
mad
e/
Fren
ch In
stitu
te fo
r Exp
lora
tion
of th
e Se
a (IF
RE
ME
R)
Pla
stic
s re
sear
chFr
ance
gove
rnm
ent
rese
arch
One
of t
he le
adin
g pe
rson
s on
pla
stic
deb
ris, F
ranc
ois
Gal
gani
, wor
ks a
t Ifr
emer
. He
has
publ
ishe
d a
rang
e of
arti
cles
on
plas
tics,
incl
udin
g m
icro
plas
tics.
ht
tp://
ww
z.ifr
emer
.fr/in
stitu
t_en
g
Stic
htin
g de
Noo
rdze
eC
oast
wat
chIn
tern
atio
nal
NG
Ore
sear
ch &
ed
ucat
ion
prog
ram
sin
ce 2
008
Stu
dyin
g th
e co
mpo
sitio
n of
was
te, i
nvol
ving
hig
h sc
hool
kid
s in
the
proc
ess.
http
://w
ww
.coa
stw
atch
.org
/Coa
stw
atch
.org
/Wel
com
e.ht
ml
Uni
vers
ity o
f She
ffiel
d to
geth
er w
ith C
entre
fo
r Env
ironm
ent,
Fish
erie
s &
Aqu
acul
ture
S
cien
ce (C
efas
)P
hD M
icro
plas
tics
rese
arch
UK
rese
arch
mon
itorin
g20
10
A P
hD s
tude
ntsh
ip c
o-fu
nded
by C
efas
is e
nabl
ing
inve
stig
atio
ns in
to th
e po
tent
ial f
or m
icro
bes
to b
iode
grad
e m
arin
e pl
astic
was
te. J
esse
H
arris
on’s
rese
arch
at t
he U
nive
rsity
of S
heffi
eld
utili
ses
DN
A-ba
sed
met
hods
to d
etec
t and
eva
luat
e th
e in
tera
ctio
ns b
etw
een
mic
robe
s an
d fra
gmen
ts o
f syn
thet
ic p
last
ics
on th
e se
abed
.
http
://w
ww
.cef
as.c
o.uk
/med
ia/3
6213
3/ce
fas-
ara-
2009
-10.
C
Inv
ento
ry o
f exi
stin
g m
icro
plas
tics
prog
ram
mes
and
sur
veys
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 93
Prog
ram
s in
the
regi
on N
orth
Sea
Uni
vers
ity o
f Ply
mou
th (R
icha
rd T
hom
pson
) &
Sir
Alis
tair
Har
dy F
ound
atio
n fo
r Oce
an
Sci
ence
(SAH
FOS
), fu
nded
by
Def
ra
PhD
Res
earc
h St
uden
tshi
p Ac
cum
ulat
ion
of m
icro
plas
tic
debr
is in
the
ocea
nsU
Kre
sear
chre
sear
ch20
10-2
013
This
rese
arch
aim
s to
est
ablis
h th
e ex
tent
to w
hich
mic
ropl
astic
deb
ris
mig
ht c
ause
har
m to
org
anis
ms
in th
e m
arin
e en
viron
men
t. Th
e pl
an o
f w
ork
and
the
obje
ctiv
es b
elow
hav
e be
en s
peci
fical
ly ta
ilore
d to
info
rm U
K
polic
y in
rela
tion
to th
e Eu
rope
an U
nion
Mar
ine
Stra
tegy
Fra
mew
ork
Dire
ctiv
e. T
he p
roje
ct h
as fi
ve s
peci
fic o
bjec
tives
: 1. T
o es
tabl
ish
whe
ther
pl
astic
mic
ropa
rticl
es s
orb
cont
amin
ants
pre
sent
in th
e m
arin
e en
viro
nmen
t, w
hich
con
tam
inan
ts a
re o
f con
cern
, and
are
they
mad
e bi
oava
ilabl
e at
leve
ls w
hich
may
caus
e si
gnifi
cant
‘har
m’ a
bove
ba
ckgr
ound
con
cent
ratio
ns. 2
. To
esta
blis
h w
heth
er c
omm
on c
hem
ical
ad
ditiv
es in
pla
stic
s pe
rsis
t afte
r age
ing
in th
e m
arin
e en
viron
men
t and
w
heth
er th
ey a
re m
ade
bioa
vaila
ble
on in
gest
ion
and
as s
uch
have
the
pote
ntia
l to
caus
e si
gnifi
cant
‘har
m’.
3. T
o es
tabl
ish
whe
ther
and
how
m
icro
plas
tics
are
pass
ed o
n th
roug
h fo
od w
eb in
tera
ctio
ns a
nd w
hat t
he
impl
icat
ions
are
for p
opul
atio
ns a
nd e
cosy
stem
s. 4
. Res
earc
h to
de
term
ine
the
exte
nt to
whi
ch th
e ph
ysic
al p
rese
nce
of m
icro
plas
tics
can
caus
e si
gnifi
cant
‘har
m’ a
nd in
wha
t qua
ntiti
es. 5
. To
esta
blis
h w
heth
er n
ew ‘b
iode
grad
able
pla
stic
s’ d
iffer
in th
eir p
oten
tial ‘
harm
’ im
pact
s.
http
://ph
dsch
olar
ship
.co.
uk/p
hd-r
esea
rch-
stud
ents
hip-
accu
mul
atio
n-of
-mic
ropl
astic
-deb
ris-in
-the-
ocea
ns-u
nive
rsity
-of-
plym
outh
-facu
lty-o
f-sci
ence
-and
-tech
nolo
gy.h
tml
Uni
vers
ity o
f Exe
ter (
Tam
ara
Gal
low
ay)
PhD
on
Impa
ct o
f nan
opar
ticle
s an
d m
icro
plas
tics
at th
e ba
se o
f the
mar
ine
food
web
: res
pons
e of
repr
oduc
tion
and
deve
lopm
ent i
n ca
lano
id c
opep
ods
UK
rese
arch
rese
arch
2010
-201
3
This
pro
ject
will
exa
min
e th
e ef
fect
s of
nan
opar
ticle
s an
d m
icro
plas
tics
in
diffe
rent
con
cent
ratio
ns o
n th
e eg
g pr
oduc
tion,
hat
chin
g su
cces
s,
deve
lopm
ent r
ates
and
diff
eren
tial g
ene
expr
essi
on o
f coa
stal
cal
anoi
d co
pepo
d sp
ecie
s. T
he p
roje
ct w
ill p
rovi
de th
e sc
ope
for l
abor
ator
y cu
lture
st
udie
s as
wel
l as
wee
kly
field
wor
k sa
mpl
ing
at s
tatio
n L4
.
http
://w
ww
.pm
l.ac.
ukw
ww
.am
t-uk.
org/
PD
F/S
tude
ntsh
ip%
20P
roje
cts_
2010
Prog
ram
s in
oth
er r
egio
ns
Inst
ituto
do
Mar
(IM
AR)
Stu
dyin
g pl
astic
s on
bea
ches
Por
tuga
lre
sear
chm
onito
ring
sinc
e 20
08
Stu
dyin
g pl
astic
deb
ris s
trand
ed o
n th
e be
ache
s in
mai
nlan
d Po
rtuga
l, an
alyz
ing
the
types
of p
last
ic a
nd th
eir d
istri
butio
n, a
nd m
ore
rece
ntly
ve
rifyi
ng th
e pr
esen
ce o
f mic
ropl
astic
s in
pla
nkto
n sa
mpl
es a
nd th
e de
grad
atio
n of
suc
h m
ater
ials
in th
e co
asta
l env
ironm
ent.
http
://w
ww
.apr
h.pt
/rgci
/rgci
-267
_Fria
s.pd
f
Uni
vers
ity o
f Pat
ras
(pro
f. H
rissi
K
arap
anag
ioti)
Mon
itorin
g of
pla
stic
pel
lets
on
beac
hes
Gre
ece
rese
arch
mon
itorin
gP
last
ic p
elle
ts o
n be
ache
s, tr
ansp
ort o
f per
sist
ent o
rgan
ic p
ollu
tant
s,
pollu
tion
mon
itorin
g in
Gre
ece.
http
://w
ww
.upa
tras.
gr/in
dex/
inde
x/la
ng/e
n
EU
mem
ber s
tate
s ar
ound
the
Med
iterr
anea
nM
editt
eran
ian
End
ange
red
(M.E
.D.)
Med
iterr
anea
nre
sear
chre
sear
ch
prog
ram
2010
- 20
13W
ill b
ette
r qua
ntify
the
dist
ribut
ion
and
unde
rsta
nd th
e dy
nam
ics
of d
ebris
po
llutio
n in
the
Med
iterr
anea
n, e
spec
ially
in m
arin
e pr
otec
ted
area
s.ht
tp://
ww
w.e
xped
ition
med
.eu/
imag
es/E
xped
ition
-ME
D-e
n.pd
f
Nat
iona
l Oce
anic
and
Atm
osph
eric
Ad
min
istra
tion
(NO
AA)
Mar
ine
Deb
ris P
rogr
am (M
DP
)U
SA
gove
rnm
ent
Mon
itorin
g20
06
Asse
ss th
e qu
antit
y of
deb
ris a
t a lo
catio
n an
d ex
pand
to re
gion
al,
char
acte
rizat
ion
acco
rdin
g to
ass
ocia
ted
land
use
, det
erm
ine
the
types
and
de
nsity
of d
ebris
pre
sent
by
mat
eria
l cat
egor
y (i.
e. p
last
ic, m
etal
, etc
.),
exam
ine
spat
ial d
istri
butio
n an
d va
riabi
lity
of d
ebris
and
inve
stig
ate
tem
pora
l tre
nds
in d
ebris
am
ount
s.
http
://m
arin
edeb
ris.n
oaa.
gov/
proj
ects
/mon
itorin
g.ht
ml
Alga
lita
Mar
ine
Res
earc
h Fo
unda
tion
Mic
ropl
astic
s re
sear
chU
SA
NG
Ore
sear
ch
prog
ram
1994
Alga
lita
coop
erat
es w
ith a
rang
e of
par
tner
s on
man
y di
ffere
nt to
pics
on
plas
tics.
Cha
rles
Moo
re, t
he fu
onde
r of t
he fo
unda
tion,
was
the
first
to
disc
over
the
plas
tic s
oup
in th
e Sa
raga
sso
Sea.
He
has
publ
ishe
d a
rang
e of
arti
cles
on
both
mac
ro- a
nd m
icro
plas
tics.
http
://w
ww
.alg
alita
.org
/inde
x.ph
p
Scr
ipps
Inst
itutio
n of
Oce
anog
raph
y at
UC
S
an D
iego
SE
APLE
XS
crip
ps E
nviro
nmen
tal A
ccum
ulat
ion
of P
last
ic E
xped
ition
See
king
the
Sci
ence
of t
he P
acifi
c O
cean
Gar
bage
Pat
chU
SA
rese
arch
rese
arch
2009
-now
From
Aug
ust 2
-21,
200
9, a
gro
up o
f doc
tora
l stu
dent
s an
d re
sear
ch
volu
ntee
rs fr
om S
crip
ps In
stitu
tion
of O
cean
ogra
phy
at U
C S
an D
iego
em
bark
ed o
n an
exp
editi
on a
boar
d th
e Sc
ripps
rese
arch
ves
sel N
ew
Hor
izon
exp
lorin
g th
e pr
oble
m o
f pla
stic
in th
e N
orth
Pac
ific
Gyr
e. T
he
Scr
ipps
Env
ironm
enta
l Acc
umul
atio
n of
Pla
stic
Exp
editi
on (S
EAP
LEX)
fo
cuse
d on
a s
uite
of c
ritic
al s
cien
tific
que
stio
ns. H
ow m
uch
plas
tic is
ac
cum
ulat
ing,
how
is it
dis
tribu
ted,
and
how
is it
affe
ctin
g oc
ean
life?
With
th
eir n
ew re
sults
the
rese
arch
ers
hope
to p
rovi
de c
ritic
al, t
imel
y da
ta to
po
licy
mak
ers
and
com
bine
Scr
ipps
' lon
g tra
ditio
n of
Pac
ific
expl
orat
ion
with
focu
s on
a n
ew a
nd p
ress
ing
envir
onm
enta
l pro
blem
.
http
://si
o.uc
sd.e
du/E
xped
ition
s/S
eapl
ex/
Inte
rnat
iona
l Pal
let W
atch
Glo
bal M
onito
ring
of P
ersi
sten
t Org
anic
Pol
luta
nts
(PO
Ps)
us
ing
Beac
hed
Plas
tic R
esin
Pel
lets
. Ja
pan
rese
arch
mon
itorin
gsi
nce
2010
Org
anic
mic
ro-p
ollu
tant
s in
the
pelle
ts w
ill b
e an
alyz
ed in
the
labo
rato
ry*.
Bas
ed o
n th
e an
alyti
cal r
esul
ts, g
loba
l dis
tribu
tion
of o
rgan
ic
mic
ro-p
ollu
tant
s w
ill b
e m
appe
d. T
he re
sults
will
be
sent
to th
e pa
rtici
pant
s th
roug
h e-
mai
l and
rele
ased
on
the
web
. Thi
s m
onito
ring
is b
ased
on
our
findi
ng th
at m
arin
e pl
astic
resi
n pe
llets
ads
orb
hydr
opho
bic
orga
nic
pollu
tant
s w
ith c
once
ntra
tion
fact
or u
p to
1,0
00,0
00. T
he p
urpo
se o
f In
tern
atio
nal P
elle
t wat
ch is
to u
nder
stan
d th
e cu
rren
t sta
tus
of g
loba
l P
OP
s po
llutio
n.
http
://w
ww
.pel
letw
atch
.org
/inde
x.ht
ml
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment94
D Inventory of stakeholders in plastics in the marine environment
Stakeholders involved in micro and macroplastics
Type Organization type of organization websiteDutch Ministry of Infrastructure & Environment (I&M) government http://english.verkeerenwaterstaat.nl/english/
Nederlandse Rubber- en Kunststofindustrie (NRK) industry www.nrk.nlIMSA industry www.imsa.nlPlastics Europe Nederland industry http://www.plasticseurope.org/Dutch Polymer Institute industry http://www.polymers.nl/Plastic Soup Foundation NGO http://www.plasticsoupfoundation.org/foundation.phpStichting de Noordzee NGO http://www.noordzee.nl/KIMO Nederland NGO http://www.kimointernational.org/NetherlandsandBelgium.aspxIVM research http://www.ivm.vu.nl/en/index.aspDeltares research www.deltares.nlIMARES research http://www.imares.wur.nl/UK/research/dossiers/plastic/IVAM (UvA) research http://www.ivam.uva.nl/?21
Europe KIMO research http://www.kimointernational.org/Home.aspxUniversity of Ghent - Steven de Meester research http://www.ugent.be/enN-Research - Fredrik Norén research www.n-research.sePlymouth University - Richard Thompson research http://www.plymouth.ac.uk/staff/rcthompson#University of Sheffield research http://www.shef.ac.uk/University of Exeter research http://www.exeter.ac.uk/Cefas research http://www.cefas.defra.gov.uk/home.aspxDefra research http://www.defra.gov.uk/Members of Task group 10 MSFD researchSir Alistair Hardy Foundation for Ocean Science (SAHFOS) research http://www.sahfos.ac.uk/Mediterranean En-Dangered (MED) researchJohann Heinrich von Thunen-Institut (vTI) research http://www.vti.bund.de/enIfremer research http://wwz.ifremer.fr/institut_engUniversité de Brest research http://www.univ-brest.fr/
World Algalita research http://www.algalita.org/index.phpGESAMP research http://gesamp.org/NOAA research http://www.noaa.gov/Members of workshop on Microplastics in Washington (NOAA, 2008) researchTokyo University - Hideshige Takada research www.pelletwatch.orgUniversity of Washington, Tacoma research http://www.tacoma.uw.edu/
Reference Van Weenen et al. (2010)
95
Stakeholders only involved in macroplastics
Type Organization type of organization websiteDutch Vereniging Nederlandse Gemeenten (VNG) government http://www.vng.nl/
Plastic heroes campaign government www.plasticheros.nlStichting Nederland Schoon government www.nederlandschoon.nlStichting Afvalstoffen en Vaardocumenten Binnenvaart government http://www.sabni.nl/Nedvang industry www.nedvang.nlVereniging van Ondernemingen in de Milieudienstverlening industry www.voms.nlNederlandse Vissersbond industry www.vissersbond.nl)Greenpeace Nederland NGO http://www.greenpeace.nl/WWF Nederland NGO http://www.wnf.nl/nl/home/?splash=1Waddenvereniging NGO http://www.waddenvereniging.nl/Duik de Noordzee Schoon private www.duikdenoordzeeschoon.nlPlastic Whale private www.plasticwhale.orgTassenBol private www.tassenbol.nlTU Delft research http://home.tudelft.nl/NIOZ research http://www.nioz.nl/RIVM research http://www.rivm.nl/en/ActGlobalT-Xchange industry http://www.designforusability.org/participants/companies/txchangeIUCN NL NGO http://www.iucn.nl/Wetsus research http://www.wetsus.nl/DHV research http://www.dhv.com/Qeam BV research http://www.qeam.com/de Amsterdamse Innovatie Motor industry http://www.aimsterdam.nl/Van Ganzewinkel industry www.vangansewinkel.comAfval Energie Bedrijf (Gem.Amsterdam) industry http://www.afvalenergiebedrijf.nl/home.aspxBSAF industry http://www.basf.nl/ecp1/Netherlands/nl/Teijin Aramid industry http://www.teijinaramid.com/Unilever industry http://www.unilever.nl/TNO research http://www.tno.nl/IDEA Consultancy research
Europe EU (DG Mare) government http://europa.eu/index_en.htmPlastics Europe industry http://www.plasticseurope.org/Electrolux industry http://group.electrolux.com/en/electrolux-unveils-five-vacs-from-the-sea-8687European Plastics Converters industry http://www.plasticsconverters.eu/SABIC industry http://www.sabic-europe.com/_en/DSM industry http://www.dsm.com/en_US/cworld/public/home/pages/home.jspCentrale Commissie voor de Rijnvaart (CCR) intergovernmental http://www.ccr-zkr.orgSeas at Risk NGO www.seas-at-risk.orgSurfrider Foundation Europe NGO www.surfrider.euOSPAR research http://www.ospar.org/European Environment Agency research http://www.eea.europa.eu/EFSA research http://www.efsa.europa.eu/HELCOM research http://www.helcom.fi/WasteKIT research http://www.wastekit.eu/University of East-Anglia research http://www.uea.ac.uk/Alfred Wegener Institute fur Polar und Meeresforschung research http://www.awi.de/en/home/
World CIPAD (Council of International Plastics Associations Directors) industry www.cipad.orgAmerican Chemistry Council (ACC) industry http://www.americanchemistry.com/default.aspxInternational Maritime Organization (IMO) intergovernmental www.imo.orgMarine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) intergovernmental www.imo.orgBlue Ocean Sciences NGO http://www.blueoceansciences.org/Clean Shipping Coalition (CSC) NGO www.cleanshipping.orgClean Seas Coalition NGO www.cleanseascoalition.orgGreenpeace NGO www.greenpeace.orgPlastic Oceans Foundation NGO http://www.plasticoceans.netSTOP Ocean Plastics NGO http://live.stopoceanplastics.orgSurfrider Foundation NGO www.surfrider.orgSeas at Risk NGO http://www.seas-at-risk.org/UNEP research http://www.unep.org/UNESCO research http://www.unesco.org/new/en/unesco/World Wildlife Foundation (WWF) NGO www.wwf.orgCoordinating Body on the Seas of East Asia (COBSEA) intergovernmental http://www.cobsea.org/Partnerships in Environmental Management for the Seas of East Asia (PEMSEA) intergovernmental http://beta.pemsea.org/US-FDA research http://www.fda.gov/
Reference Van Weenen et al. (2010)
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment96
Stakeholders only involved in macroplastics
Type Organization type of organization websiteDutch Vereniging Nederlandse Gemeenten (VNG) government http://www.vng.nl/
Plastic heroes campaign government www.plasticheros.nlStichting Nederland Schoon government www.nederlandschoon.nlStichting Afvalstoffen en Vaardocumenten Binnenvaart government http://www.sabni.nl/Nedvang industry www.nedvang.nlVereniging van Ondernemingen in de Milieudienstverlening industry www.voms.nlNederlandse Vissersbond industry www.vissersbond.nl)Greenpeace Nederland NGO http://www.greenpeace.nl/WWF Nederland NGO http://www.wnf.nl/nl/home/?splash=1Waddenvereniging NGO http://www.waddenvereniging.nl/Duik de Noordzee Schoon private www.duikdenoordzeeschoon.nlPlastic Whale private www.plasticwhale.orgTassenBol private www.tassenbol.nlTU Delft research http://home.tudelft.nl/NIOZ research http://www.nioz.nl/RIVM research http://www.rivm.nl/en/ActGlobalT-Xchange industry http://www.designforusability.org/participants/companies/txchangeIUCN NL NGO http://www.iucn.nl/Wetsus research http://www.wetsus.nl/DHV research http://www.dhv.com/Qeam BV research http://www.qeam.com/de Amsterdamse Innovatie Motor industry http://www.aimsterdam.nl/Van Ganzewinkel industry www.vangansewinkel.comAfval Energie Bedrijf (Gem.Amsterdam) industry http://www.afvalenergiebedrijf.nl/home.aspxBSAF industry http://www.basf.nl/ecp1/Netherlands/nl/Teijin Aramid industry http://www.teijinaramid.com/Unilever industry http://www.unilever.nl/TNO research http://www.tno.nl/IDEA Consultancy research
Europe EU (DG Mare) government http://europa.eu/index_en.htmPlastics Europe industry http://www.plasticseurope.org/Electrolux industry http://group.electrolux.com/en/electrolux-unveils-five-vacs-from-the-sea-8687European Plastics Converters industry http://www.plasticsconverters.eu/SABIC industry http://www.sabic-europe.com/_en/DSM industry http://www.dsm.com/en_US/cworld/public/home/pages/home.jspCentrale Commissie voor de Rijnvaart (CCR) intergovernmental http://www.ccr-zkr.orgSeas at Risk NGO www.seas-at-risk.orgSurfrider Foundation Europe NGO www.surfrider.euOSPAR research http://www.ospar.org/European Environment Agency research http://www.eea.europa.eu/EFSA research http://www.efsa.europa.eu/HELCOM research http://www.helcom.fi/WasteKIT research http://www.wastekit.eu/University of East-Anglia research http://www.uea.ac.uk/Alfred Wegener Institute fur Polar und Meeresforschung research http://www.awi.de/en/home/
World CIPAD (Council of International Plastics Associations Directors) industry www.cipad.orgAmerican Chemistry Council (ACC) industry http://www.americanchemistry.com/default.aspxInternational Maritime Organization (IMO) intergovernmental www.imo.orgMarine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) intergovernmental www.imo.orgBlue Ocean Sciences NGO http://www.blueoceansciences.org/Clean Shipping Coalition (CSC) NGO www.cleanshipping.orgClean Seas Coalition NGO www.cleanseascoalition.orgGreenpeace NGO www.greenpeace.orgPlastic Oceans Foundation NGO http://www.plasticoceans.netSTOP Ocean Plastics NGO http://live.stopoceanplastics.orgSurfrider Foundation NGO www.surfrider.orgSeas at Risk NGO http://www.seas-at-risk.org/UNEP research http://www.unep.org/UNESCO research http://www.unesco.org/new/en/unesco/World Wildlife Foundation (WWF) NGO www.wwf.orgCoordinating Body on the Seas of East Asia (COBSEA) intergovernmental http://www.cobsea.org/Partnerships in Environmental Management for the Seas of East Asia (PEMSEA) intergovernmental http://beta.pemsea.org/US-FDA research http://www.fda.gov/
Reference Van Weenen et al. (2010)
E Participant list of expert dialogue held 26 September 2011 in Utrecht
Blom, G. Deltares Software Centre, Deltares, NL
Dagevos, J. North Sea Foundation, NL
Den Herder, K. Directorate Sustainability, Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment, NL
Graafland, L. Water Affairs Directorate-General, Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment, NL
Hamerlink, R. Rijkswaterstaat, Directorate North Sea, Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment, NL
Houben-Michalková, A. Rijkswaterstaat, Centre for Water Management (WD), Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment, NL
Jonkers, N. IVAM Research and Consultancy on Sustainability
Kaasenbrood, S. PlasticsEurope Nederland
Kleissen, F. Marine and Coastal Systems, Deltares, NL
Kotte, M. Rijkswaterstaat, Centre for Water Management (WD), Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment, NL
Leslie, H.A. Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM), VU University Amsterdam, NL
Licher, C. Directorate Environment and International Affairs, Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment, NL
Maes, T. Cefas, UK
Merkx, B. Waste Free Oceans, BE
Oosterbaan, L. Rijkswaterstaat, Directorate North Sea, Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment, NL
Pors, J. IMSA Amsterdam, NL
Robbens, J. Institute for Agricultural and Fisheries Research (ILVO), BE
Roex, E. Subsurface and Groundwater Systems, Deltares, NL
Van der Graaf, S. Rijkswaterstaat, Centre for Water Management (WD), Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment, NL
Van der Grijp, N. Institute for Environmental Studies (IVM), VU University Amsterdam, NL
Van der Linden, L. Scenarios and Policy Analysis, Deltares, NL
Van der Minne, F. Van Gansewinkel, NL
Van Franeker, J.A. IMARES, NL
Van Urk, W. Water Affairs Directorate-General, Ministry of Infrastructure and Environment, NL
Van Weenen, H. Plastic Soup Foundation, NL
Veerman, B. KIMO Netherlands-Belgium, NL
Vethaak, D. Marine and Coastal Systems, Deltares, NL
1203772-000-ZKS-002, 14 November 2011
Microplastic Litter in the Dutch Marine Environment 97